https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86605
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> So on the trunk we get:
> if (&test != 4B)
> goto ; [70.00%]
> else
> goto ; [30.00%]
>
>[local count: 322122544]:
>
>[local count: 10737418
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101585
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86475
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64372
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zhonghao at pku dot org.cn
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53294
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38658
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57752
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCONFI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28389
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|SUSPENDED |NEW
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58091
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
clang started to reject it in clang 9.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58184
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Still accepted on the trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60273
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
The DR is still active but clang no longer accepts the code. and GCC no longer
crashes either.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53725
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61834
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCONFI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65591
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
We should be able to do a loop instead of 1000 calls though.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65789
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29328
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||puetzk at puetzk dot org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79582
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44282
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jacek at codeweavers dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100952
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by HaoChen Gui :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3382846558e02044598556e66e5ea1cb3115429d
commit r12-2479-g3382846558e02044598556e66e5ea1cb3115429d
Author: Haochen Gui
Date: Fri J
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101587
Bug ID: 101587
Summary: uninitialized_copy/move incorrectly uses std::min
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101588
Bug ID: 101588
Summary: rejects valid constexpr when binding from a constexpr
function
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-valid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66287
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101589
Bug ID: 101589
Summary: Incorrect implementation of LWG 3533 for elements_view
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101588
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note clang was only fixed in clang 12.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101588
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|rejects valid constexpr |[DR2126] rejects valid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68985
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Blocks|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004
Bug 55004 depends on bug 68985, which changed state.
Bug 68985 Summary: braced initializer bug when defining a static constexpr int
within a class
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68985
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71534
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||55004
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69700
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004
Bug 55004 depends on bug 69700, which changed state.
Bug 69700 Summary: [C++14] constexpr incorrectly implies const
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69700
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68258
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97529
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-07-23
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101590
Bug ID: 101590
Summary: (len & - N) <= len is not optimized to 1
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101589
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.4
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101591
Bug ID: 101591
Summary: (a|b) ==/!= a -> (b & ~a) ==/!= 0 on gimple
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101591
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I noticed this while working on PR96779
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96779
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101591
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101591
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> Mine, something like:
> (for cmp (eq ne)
> (simplify
> (cmp:c (bit_ior @0 INTEGER_CST@1) @0)
> (cmp:c (bit_and @1 (bit_not @0)) { build_zero_cst (TREE_TYPE(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101586
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101592
Bug ID: 101592
Summary: ICE in wide_int_to_tree, at tree.c:1427
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101593
Bug ID: 101593
Summary: mips: operands missing mode
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Ass
ion 12.0.0 20210722 (experimental) (GCC)
git version 4048d8a08621820dd6cc6035e13de3c3c82af4a5
***
$ gcc -O2 -fno-if-conversion -fno-ssa-phiopt -fno-tree-ch
-fno-tree-dominator-opts -fno-tree-pre -fno-tree-reassoc -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101546
--- Comment #4 from Stanislav Šimek ---
Hi this is copy paste mistake, we are using same compile comands for 11.1.0 and
10.2.
Correct one
Command Line: mips_gcc_sde_elf_11.1.0/bin/mips-sde-elf-gcc-O0 -Wunused
> -Wreturn-type -Wundef -fno-co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101594
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101594
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
201 - 246 of 246 matches
Mail list logo