[Bug libstdc++/101583] [12 Regression] error: use of deleted function when building gold

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101583 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Target Milestone|---

[Bug tree-optimization/101568] [12 regression] g++.dg/ipa/pr82352.C fails after r12-2338

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101568 --- Comment #1 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Martin Sebor : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:50f3ac1beb0cb400484dd2621dd0e3e530583e69 commit r12-2474-g50f3ac1beb0cb400484dd2621dd0e3e530583e69 Author: Martin Sebor Date: Thu

[Bug testsuite/101568] [12 regression] g++.dg/ipa/pr82352.C fails after r12-2338

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101568 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/101582] C++ FE doesn't accept attribute-declaration

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101582 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org Last

[Bug target/101393] PowerPC32 inline assembly broken by commit 2d94f7dea9c73ef3c116a0ddc722724578a860fe

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101393 --- Comment #15 from Franz Sirl --- (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #14) > (In reply to Franz Sirl from comment #12) > > The emitted .machine is easy to fix, what's not so easy to fix is the > > intention behind Segher's change that

[Bug sanitizer/101576] -fsaniitize=undefined silences clear nullptr dereference warning at compile time

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101576 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug target/101393] PowerPC32 inline assembly broken by commit 2d94f7dea9c73ef3c116a0ddc722724578a860fe

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101393 --- Comment #16 from Franz Sirl --- Created attachment 51199 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51199&action=edit Patch version with minimum changes against GCC10 This is the minimum version of the patch, it fixes this PR but

[Bug tree-optimization/65178] incorrect -Wmaybe-uninitialized when using nested loops

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65178 --- Comment #17 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Martin Sebor : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b362d7947b37059fdb6de62145fa5146258dd58f commit r12-2475-gb362d7947b37059fdb6de62145fa5146258dd58f Author: Martin Sebor Date: Thu

[Bug tree-optimization/65178] incorrect -Wmaybe-uninitialized when using nested loops

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65178 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Target Milestone|---

[Bug middle-end/24639] [meta-bug] bug to track all Wuninitialized issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639 Bug 24639 depends on bug 65178, which changed state. Bug 65178 Summary: incorrect -Wmaybe-uninitialized when using nested loops https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65178 What|Removed |Added

[Bug sanitizer/101111] xgcc cross-compiler for x86_64-apple-darwin in GCC 11.1 doesn't generate weak symbols, resulting in undefined reference to ___lsan_default_suppressions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Ever confirmed|0

[Bug c/91432] gcc -Wimplicit-fallthrough does not warn when fallthrough to break;

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91432 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4

[Bug c++/39043] C++ compiler doesn't optimize inlined function call for PIE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39043 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |5.0 Resolution|---

[Bug c++/42743] Inexplicable error message with constructing SIMD values

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42743 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0 Keywords|

[Bug libstdc++/101583] [12 Regression] error: use of deleted function when building gold

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101583 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8ed6cfbbee74ec9e03f2558b9c36f61dd7d4dcfd commit r12-2476-g8ed6cfbbee74ec9e03f2558b9c36f61dd7d4dcfd Author: Jonathan Wakely Date:

[Bug libstdc++/101583] [12 Regression] error: use of deleted function when building gold

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101583 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug middle-end/53068] collect2 breaks link order control

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53068 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |WONTFIX Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug ipa/101502] Inconsistent behavior in maybe_record_node()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101502 --- Comment #1 from Martin Liška --- @Honza: Can you please take a look? @Feng: Do you have a test-case for it, please?

[Bug middle-end/53875] calls to const functions are eliminated at -O0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53875 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Component|c++ |middle-end --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pi

[Bug c++/58045] gcc 4.8 produces an undefined reference to an inline function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58045 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- I cannot reproduce this in the released version of GCC 4.8.0.

[Bug middle-end/61785] Sigsegv with enabled optimize -Os , -O2 in sample_format_size

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61785 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Component|c++ |middle-end Status|UNCONFIRME

[Bug sanitizer/101111] xgcc cross-compiler for x86_64-apple-darwin in GCC 11.1 doesn't generate weak symbols, resulting in undefined reference to ___lsan_default_suppressions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10 --- Comment #9 from Iain Sandoe --- (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #8) > Sure, but I would like to first speak Iain who added the code. > What do you think about the patch? hm, sorry for introducing the bash-ism, the change LGTM but I w

[Bug c++/67605] Compilation errors creating std::pair using templated arguments

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67605 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |INVALID Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/68209] C++11 code compiled without -std=c++11 but doesn't work as expected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68209 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Target Milestone|---

[Bug c++/71052] Use of Range Based For Loop in unsupported dialect results in malformed code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71052 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Status|UNCONFIRME

[Bug c++/68209] C++11 code compiled without -std=c++11 but doesn't work as expected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68209 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE --- Comment #7 from Andrew Pin

[Bug c++/71052] Use of Range Based For Loop in unsupported dialect results in malformed code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71052 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mirzayanovmr at gmail dot com --- Commen

[Bug c++/71052] Use of Range Based For Loop in unsupported dialect results in malformed code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71052 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail||7.3.0, 8.1.0 Known to work|

[Bug c++/71052] Use of Range Based For Loop in unsupported dialect results in malformed code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71052 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug c++/60935] Endless loop when compiling a recursive function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60935 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|accepts-invalid, diagnostic |compile-time-hog --- Comment #1 from And

[Bug c++/81129] GCC successfully compiles expression into nothing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81129 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/81901] false-positive -Warray-bounds

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81901 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|WAITING

[Bug c++/82000] Missed optimization of char_traits::length() on constant string

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82000 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/89688] [9 Regression] -Wstringop-overflow confused by const 2D array of char

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89688 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ldionne.2 at gmail dot com --- Comment #

[Bug c++/82888] terrible code generation for initialization of POD array members vs. clang

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82888 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||compile-time-hog Last reconfirmed|2017

[Bug c++/84469] GCC rejects valid code in structured binding in range-based-for in template

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84469 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2018-02-20 00:00:00 |2021-7-22 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pin

[Bug c++/85205] Optimalisation fails when using a union to allocate space on stack

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85205 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug analyzer/94355] support for C++ new expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94355 William Navarre changed: What|Removed |Added CC||navarre.gcc.bugs at gmail dot com ---

[Bug tree-optimization/82658] Suboptimal codegen on AVR when right-shifting 8-bit unsigned integers.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82658 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Component|c++ |tree-optimization Resolution|---

[Bug c++/87456] Attributes on a global empty statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87456 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/101582] C++ FE doesn't accept attribute-declaration

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101582 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||aaron.ballman+gcc at gmail dot com ---

[Bug libstdc++/100982] wrong constraint in std::optional::operator=

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100982 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b06478ca4142ca204133351da45691c787314f64 commit r9-9637-gb06478ca4142ca204133351da45691c787314f64 Author: Jonathan Wakely

[Bug libstdc++/92156] Cannot in-place construct std::any with std::any

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92156 --- Comment #6 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:14597b680a24b6f7375e4470dea935da9c369feb commit r9-9638-g14597b680a24b6f7375e4470dea935da9c369feb Author: Jonathan Wakely

[Bug libstdc++/90415] [9 Regression] std::is_copy_constructible> is incomplete

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90415 --- Comment #17 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:14597b680a24b6f7375e4470dea935da9c369feb commit r9-9638-g14597b680a24b6f7375e4470dea935da9c369feb Author: Jonathan Wakely

[Bug libstdc++/101034] wrong constraint in std::any's constructor

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101034 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:df0438f1493c4fe1a7380519d9013148618d9782 commit r9-9639-gdf0438f1493c4fe1a7380519d9013148618d9782 Author: Jonathan Wakely

[Bug libstdc++/64735] std::future broken on armel

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64735 --- Comment #16 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ba5e10a8c84f56bb2838adb6d1cc9b74741ac4f1 commit r9-9640-gba5e10a8c84f56bb2838adb6d1cc9b74741ac4f1 Author: Jonathan Wakely

[Bug libstdc++/96657] [9 Regression] libsupc++.a missing required functions from src/c++98/atomicity.cc when atomic builtins are not supported

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96657 --- Comment #10 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ba5e10a8c84f56bb2838adb6d1cc9b74741ac4f1 commit r9-9640-gba5e10a8c84f56bb2838adb6d1cc9b74741ac4f1 Author: Jonathan Wakely

[Bug libstdc++/96657] [9 Regression] libsupc++.a missing required functions from src/c++98/atomicity.cc when atomic builtins are not supported

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96657 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/89322] Use of new and -lsupc++ requires -lstdc++ on architectures without atomics

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89322 Bug 89322 depends on bug 96657, which changed state. Bug 96657 Summary: [9 Regression] libsupc++.a missing required functions from src/c++98/atomicity.cc when atomic builtins are not supported https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96657

[Bug libstdc++/100982] wrong constraint in std::optional::operator=

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100982 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug libstdc++/92156] Cannot in-place construct std::any with std::any

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92156 --- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely --- Fixed for 9.5 too.

[Bug libstdc++/90415] [9 Regression] std::is_copy_constructible> is incomplete

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90415 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug libstdc++/101034] wrong constraint in std::any's constructor

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101034 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug tree-optimization/101584] New: missing -Wuninitialized with an allocated object after a built-in call

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101584 Bug ID: 101584 Summary: missing -Wuninitialized with an allocated object after a built-in call Product: gcc Version: 11.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: norma

[Bug analyzer/94355] support for C++ new expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94355 --- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to William Navarre from comment #8) > It seems that `operator new` is generally not supposed to return NULL -- > std::bad_alloc() is supposed to be thrown instead. If an operator new overload is

[Bug middle-end/88831] the layout of .data section of a binary is slightly changed when -g option is enabled.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88831 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|1 |0 Status|WAITING

[Bug c++/89897] suggest header for SIGABRT

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89897 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement

[Bug tree-optimization/90304] -O3 vectorization gets worse when code is moved into main()

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90304 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement

[Bug tree-optimization/90304] -O3 vectorization gets worse when code is inlined

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90304 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|-O3 vectorization gets |-O3 vectorization gets

[Bug c++/17913] ICE jumping into statement expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17913 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|NEW

[Bug c++/772] Statement expressions issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=772 --- Comment #18 from Andrew Pinski --- *** Bug 17913 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug c++/70741] segfault when jumping into statement expression in array initializer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70741 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/772] Statement expressions issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=772 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||donald.chai at synopsys dot com --- Commen

[Bug c++/89003] Return inside a statement expression while initializing a static local variable fails to cleanup cxa_guard

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89003 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Depends on|

[Bug c++/772] Statement expressions issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=772 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||89003 CC|

[Bug c++/92559] Returning std∷map breaks tail-recursion optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92559 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- I don't think this can ever be optimized. Mainly because there are copies happening due to passing via value and returning by value. If I change it to foo to MyMap &foo(MyMap &m), I get the behavior you wan

[Bug c/101585] New: Bad interaction of -fsanitize=undefined and -Wvla-parameters

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101585 Bug ID: 101585 Summary: Bad interaction of -fsanitize=undefined and -Wvla-parameters Product: gcc Version: 11.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug middle-end/95103] Unexpected -Wclobbered in bits/vector.tcc with -O2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95103 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-07-22 Component|c++

[Bug c++/95703] [9 only] Please backport 0998d2fd59e7a5eb3a3566c57625702bbdc6a05f to gcc 9

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95703 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Please backport |[9 only] Please backport

[Bug analyzer/101570] [12 Regression] ICE in maybe_reconstruct_from_def_stmt, at analyzer/analyzer.cc:133

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101570 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-07-22 Status|UNCONFIRM

[Bug c++/96396] initializer_list in `-fconcepts -std=c++11` reports internal compiler error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96396 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2020-08-03 00:00:00 |2021-7-22 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pin

[Bug middle-end/101586] New: ICE:in clear_padding_type, at gimple-fold.c:4783 with call to __builtin_clear_padding for C++

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101586 Bug ID: 101586 Summary: ICE:in clear_padding_type, at gimple-fold.c:4783 with call to __builtin_clear_padding for C++ Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/68487] [concepts] bad "invalid reference to variadic concept" error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68487 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug c++/67491] [meta-bug] concepts issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67491 Bug 67491 depends on bug 68487, which changed state. Bug 68487 Summary: [concepts] bad "invalid reference to variadic concept" error https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68487 What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug c++/68246] [concepts] Incorrect evaluation of C++1z fold expressions (... || expr) in concepts

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68246 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |7.0 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski -

[Bug c++/69189] [concepts] ICE: segmentation fault in instantiate_template_1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69189 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Keywords|

[Bug c++/67491] [meta-bug] concepts issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67491 Bug 67491 depends on bug 69189, which changed state. Bug 69189 Summary: [concepts] ICE: segmentation fault in instantiate_template_1 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69189 What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug c++/71808] [concepts] ICE in finish_member_declaration

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71808 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- GCC 10 and above don't ICE but errors out: : In instantiation of 'struct model': :2:42: required from here :17:25: error: template constraint failure for 'template requires Fooable struct container' 17

[Bug c++/79994] Concepts technical specification

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79994 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- GCC 10 and above rejects reduced testcase in comment 1: GCC 10: : In instantiation of 'void add(T&) [with T = Directed_Graph_impl]': :3:8: recursively required from 'void add(T&) [with T = Directed_Graph_im

[Bug c++/71141] [concepts] Example variadic concept code in the Concepts TS 14.1p9.4 rejected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71141 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Keywords|

[Bug c++/67491] [meta-bug] concepts issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67491 Bug 67491 depends on bug 71141, which changed state. Bug 71141 Summary: [concepts] Example variadic concept code in the Concepts TS 14.1p9.4 rejected https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71141 What|Removed

[Bug c++/71543] [concepts] ICE on ill-formed declaration of a parameter with a constrained-type-specifier in a requires expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71543 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- GCC 10 and above reject the code: :4:28: error: placeholder type not allowed in this context 4 | concept bool C2 = requires(C1 c1) {}; |^~ :4:36: error: expected primary-

[Bug tree-optimization/101584] missing -Wuninitialized with an allocated object after a built-in call

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101584 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned a

[Bug tree-optimization/101494] [11 Regression] -Wmaybe-uninitialized false alarm with memrchr of size 0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101494 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch Target Milestone|---

[Bug c++/84344] [concepts] ICE with invalid use of auto

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84344 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/67491] [meta-bug] concepts issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67491 Bug 67491 depends on bug 84344, which changed state. Bug 84344 Summary: [concepts] ICE with invalid use of auto https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84344 What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/70401] [c++1z] variadic template failed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70401 --- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski --- This is still rejected with -std=c++17 but accepted with -std=c++14 . Note since GCC 11, we default to C++17 so this might be important thing to fix.

[Bug c++/84745] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault (main_block_label())

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84745 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|NEW

[Bug c++/772] Statement expressions issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=772 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vegard.nossum at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug target/101393] PowerPC32 inline assembly broken by commit 2d94f7dea9c73ef3c116a0ddc722724578a860fe

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101393 --- Comment #17 from Segher Boessenkool --- (In reply to Franz Sirl from comment #15) > > "7400" and "403" are not supported target attribute values, fwiw (says the > > manual). > > Hmm, I don't understand what you mean. I mean that I cannot r

[Bug inline-asm/84728] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault (is_gimple_variable())

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84728 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Component|c++ |inline-asm Resolution|---

[Bug c/100501] ICE: segmentation fault on embedded asm code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100501 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vegard.nossum at gmail dot com --- Comm

[Bug c++/101219] [12 Regression] ice in perform_or_defer_access_check since r12-1804-g65870e75616ee435

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101219 --- Comment #8 from Sergei Trofimovich --- Proposed simplistic change as https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-July/575867.html

[Bug c++/84714] internal compiler error: in create_tmp_var, at gimple-expr.c:476

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84714 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|---

[Bug c++/84977] ICE: Segmentation fault (build_x_unary_op())

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84977 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|---

[Bug c++/84971] ICE in build_non_dependent_expr, at cp/pt.c:25367

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84971 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2018-03-20 00:00:00 |2021-7-22 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pin

[Bug c++/86579] invalid operands to binary expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86579 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/87699] Implement CWG 1512

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87699 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||zhonghao at pku dot org.cn --- Comment #

[Bug tree-optimization/86605] Suboptimal code for pointer arithmetic with 'this'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86605 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Component|c++ |tree-optimization Last reconfirmed|201

[Bug c/101585] [11/12 Regression] Bad interaction of -fsanitize=undefined and -Wvla-parameters

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101585 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Bad interaction of |[11/12 Regression] Bad

<    1   2   3   >