[Bug tree-optimization/83715] Missed optimization in math expression: optimize double comparing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83715 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2018-01-06 00:00:00 |2021-12-17 Severity|normal

[Bug debug/103756] New: [12 Regression] -fcompare-debug failure (length) with -O -fconserve-stack -frename-registers -fno-tree-ch -fira-algorithm=priority

gnu --with-ld=/usr/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-ld --with-as=/usr/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-as --disable-libstdcxx-pch --prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-r12-6031-20211217093444-g79a89108dd3-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-nobootstrap-amd64 Thread model: posix Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd gcc version 12.0.0 20211217 (experimental) (GCC)

[Bug middle-end/84673] Overcomplicated code generation for a chain of mutually exclusive conditions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84673 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Component|tree-optimization |middle-end Last reconfirmed|

[Bug rtl-optimization/103756] [12 Regression] -fcompare-debug failure (length) with -O -fconserve-stack -frename-registers -fno-tree-ch -fira-algorithm=priority

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103756 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ra, wrong-code Target Milestone|---

[Bug ipa/86141] C++ Related Optimization Problem

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86141 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |WONTFIX Component|tree-optimiza

[Bug tree-optimization/88841] Missed optimization transforming cascading ||s into a bit select

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88841 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement Last reconfirmed|2019-01-1

[Bug tree-optimization/88841] Missed optimization transforming cascading ||s into a bit select

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88841 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- For the trunk for _2, if_to_switch can convert that one to: ;; Canonical GIMPLE case clusters: 9-10 13 32 ;; BT can be built: BT:9-32 Removing basic block 3 Expanded into a new gimple STMT: switch (c_6(D))

[Bug rtl-optimization/103756] [12 Regression] -fcompare-debug failure (length) with -O -fconserve-stack -frename-registers -fno-tree-ch -fira-algorithm=priority since r12-5978-ga888259a71fbbb7f

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103756 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[12 Regression] |[12 Regression] |-fcom

[Bug libfortran/98076] Increase speed of integer I/O

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98076 --- Comment #7 from Francois-Xavier Coudert --- Created attachment 52023 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52023&action=edit First patch to speed up gfc_itoa() There was a bug in the previous patch (when we write out the low d

[Bug middle-end/63272] GCC should warn when using pointer to dead scoped variable within the same function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63272 --- Comment #7 from David Binderman --- (In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #5) > Patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-November/583045.html Weeks have rolled by and this patch doesn't seem to have made it into trunk. Disappoi

[Bug libquadmath/99203] Undefined behaviour in libquadmath file print_fp.c function __quadmath_printf_fp

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99203 Francois-Xavier Coudert changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org -

[Bug target/97827] bootstrap error building the amdgcn-amdhsa offload compiler with LLVM 11

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97827 --- Comment #18 from Tobias Burnus --- POST SCRIPT / STATUS UPDATE (This PR remains FIXED) (In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #16) > > I unfortunately missed in my the LLVM patch that '.rodata' implies flags and > > messed up the check. Sho

[Bug fortran/103757] New: compiler rejects import, {none,all,only}, does not recognize the keyword

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103757 Bug ID: 103757 Summary: compiler rejects import, {none,all,only}, does not recognize the keyword Product: gcc Version: 10.3.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: nor

[Bug fortran/103757] compiler rejects import, {none,all,only}, does not recognize the keyword

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103757 --- Comment #1 from Bastiaan Braams --- Correction, it should say "import, only : wp" (single colon). Same error message.

[Bug c++/93699] Invalid operator== (returning non-bool type) candidate

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93699 --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely --- Personally, I think it should remain ill-formed. Maybe -fpermissive could allow it (for compat with previous standards) but unfortunately that flag is far too permissive and enables all kinds of ancient le

[Bug c++/91780] Discrepancy between gcc 7.4, through 9.2, compared to clang.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91780 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|needs-bisection | --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely

[Bug c++/91780] Discrepancy between gcc 7.4, through 9.2, compared to clang.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91780 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #4) > Fixed by r11-1571 and r10-8343, although I'm not sure how that affected it. I suspect it is the tsubst_pack_expansion change.

[Bug c++/91780] Discrepancy between gcc 7.4, through 9.2, compared to clang.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91780 --- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5) > (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #4) > > Fixed by r11-1571 and r10-8343, although I'm not sure how that affected it. > > I suspect it is the tsubst_pack

[Bug libstdc++/103755] {has,use}_facet() and iostream constructor performance

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103755 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Severity|normal

[Bug c++/91780] Discrepancy between gcc 7.4, through 9.2, compared to clang.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91780 --- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely --- Before that commit, the zip(as, bs) deduced the type as zip, vector>, rather than zip&, vector&>. So: (In reply to Mikael Persson from comment #0) > GCC does not change values in tuple of references Is w

[Bug c++/91780] Discrepancy between gcc 7.4, through 9.2, compared to clang.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91780 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|needs-reduction | --- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely

[Bug c++/91780] Discrepancy between gcc 7.4, through 9.2, compared to clang.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91780 --- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely --- GCC 10.1 isn't using the deduction guide at all, it seems to prefer to deduce the class type using the zip(Containers...) constructor, which deduces non-reference types. If I change the deduction guide to:

[Bug tree-optimization/103741] [12 Regression] ICE in prepare_vec_mask, at tree-vect-stmts.c:1808 since r12-5772-g06f2e7d49fc6341ea0128ccd83fd13705dd2c523

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103741 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Tamar Christina : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:411ac94611f164fac7ec1cd5953549c0a56cf43a commit r12-6038-g411ac94611f164fac7ec1cd5953549c0a56cf43a Author: Tamar Christina Date:

[Bug tree-optimization/103741] [12 Regression] ICE in prepare_vec_mask, at tree-vect-stmts.c:1808 since r12-5772-g06f2e7d49fc6341ea0128ccd83fd13705dd2c523

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103741 Tamar Christina changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug c++/40225] Mishandled throw/catch with throw in constructor and rethrow in set_terminate

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40225 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/57533] When throwing local variable, it's being move-constructed even if not going out of scope.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57533 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||11.1.0 Known to fail|

[Bug c++/14769] [DR 426] Block extern incorrectly resolved to file-scope internal linkage object

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14769 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|wrong-code |accepts-invalid Blocks|

[Bug c++/94764] block extern incorrectly resolved to external linkage

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94764 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/14769] [DR 426] Block extern incorrectly resolved to file-scope internal linkage object

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14769 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tabloid.adroit at gmail dot com --- Comm

[Bug c++/35835] Compiler fails to recognize match of local "extern" declarations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35835 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.0 Resolution|---

[Bug c++/83264] std::initializer_list with a single element selects the wrong overload

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83264 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug testsuite/102944] Many gcc.dg/Wstringop-overflow-*.c failures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102944 --- Comment #7 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- > --- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor --- > I don't see any of the FAILs or XFAILs listed in comment #0 with cross > compilers for any of the Targets. Can this report be resolved? The fa

[Bug target/103750] [i386] GCC schedules KMOV instructions that destroys performance in loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103750 --- Comment #5 from Thiago Macieira --- Maybe this is running afoul of GCC's thinking that a simple register-register move is free? I've seen it save a constant in an opmask register, but kmov{d,q} is not free like mov{l,q} is.

[Bug target/103750] [i386] GCC schedules KMOV instructions that destroys performance in loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103750 --- Comment #6 from Thiago Macieira --- It got worse. Now I'm seeing: .L807: vmovdqu16 (%rsi), %ymm2 vmovdqu16 32(%rsi), %ymm3 vpcmpuw $6, %ymm0, %ymm2, %k2 vpcmpuw $6, %ymm0, %ymm3, %k3 kmovw

[Bug c++/83264] std::initializer_list with a single element selects the wrong overload

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83264 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- Maybe another case of DR 2137 (PR 85577)

[Bug target/103750] [i386] GCC schedules KMOV instructions that destroys performance in loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103750 --- Comment #7 from Thiago Macieira --- I should add the same is not happening for Char == char, meaning the returned type is an __mmask32 (unsigned) vmovdqu8(%rsi), %ymm2 vmovdqu832(%rsi), %ymm3 vpcmpub

[Bug c++/83264] std::initializer_list with a single element selects the wrong overload

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83264 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Alias||Cwg1467 Resolution|---

[Bug c++/83264] std::initializer_list with a single element selects the wrong overload

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83264 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- https://wg21.link/cwg1467

[Bug target/103750] [i386] GCC schedules KMOV instructions that destroys performance in loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103750 --- Comment #8 from Thiago Macieira --- Update again: looks like the issue was the next line I didn't paste, which was performing _kortestz_mask32_u8 on an __mmask16. The type mismatch was causing this problem. If I Use the correct _kortestz_ma

[Bug sanitizer/84250] Symbol collision when using both Address and Undefined Behavior sanitizers (-fsanitize=address,undefined)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84250 --- Comment #11 from Marek Polacek --- (In reply to chefmax from comment #10) > Hi Marek, sorry, I'm not really tracking this anymore :(. Hi, understood. > I don't remember exactly why option 1) from > https://github.com/google/sanitizers/issue

[Bug c++/84573] missing warning on an uninstantiated function template returning T with no return statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84573 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug tree-optimization/103744] [12 Regression] ICE in operator[], at vec.h:889 since r12-5612-g10833849b55401a52f2334eb032a70beb688e9fc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103744 --- Comment #5 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Arseny Solokha from comment #4) > The apparently related case: I think this is actually a separate bug. Could you open a new PR for it?

[Bug tree-optimization/103744] [12 Regression] ICE in operator[], at vec.h:889 since r12-5612-g10833849b55401a52f2334eb032a70beb688e9fc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103744 --- Comment #6 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e781cb93d7d908f1f4f1611d0034eccbd1478e91 commit r12-6041-ge781cb93d7d908f1f4f1611d0034eccbd1478e91 Author: Richard Sandiford D

[Bug tree-optimization/103744] [12 Regression] ICE in operator[], at vec.h:889 since r12-5612-g10833849b55401a52f2334eb032a70beb688e9fc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103744 rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|

[Bug testsuite/102944] Many gcc.dg/Wstringop-overflow-*.c failures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102944 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/88443] [meta-bug] bogus/missing -Wstringop-overflow warnings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88443 Bug 88443 depends on bug 102944, which changed state. Bug 102944 Summary: Many gcc.dg/Wstringop-overflow-*.c failures https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102944 What|Removed |Added -

[Bug target/103750] [i386] GCC schedules KMOV instructions that destroys performance in loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103750 --- Comment #9 from Uroš Bizjak --- (In reply to Thiago Macieira from comment #0) > Testcase: ... > The assembly for this produces: > > vmovdqu16 (%rdi), %ymm1 > vmovdqu16 32(%rdi), %ymm2 > vpcmpuw $0, %ymm0,

[Bug c++/84573] missing warning on an uninstantiated function template returning T with no return statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84573 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW --- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor ---

[Bug middle-end/102080] [12 Regression] avx512vl related ICE, on firefox-92 gcc ICEs: in expand_insn, at optabs.c:7946 by r12-2679

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102080 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug middle-end/102080] [12 Regression] avx512vl related ICE, on firefox-92 gcc ICEs: in expand_insn, at optabs.c:7946 by r12-2679

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102080 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug c++/83264] std::initializer_list with a single element selects the wrong overload

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83264 --- Comment #5 from Ruslan Altynbaev --- Actually DR 2137 describes that: https://wg21.link/cwg2137

[Bug fortran/103757] [F18] compiler rejects import, {none, all, only}, does not recognize the keyword

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103757 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Keywords|

[Bug c++/96517] ICE in is_this_parameter when accessing constexpr method of a field inside coroutine lambda (with optimization)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96517 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:39d2ec41509e3b0d130215a65d7aacbd064b5532 commit r12-6044-g39d2ec41509e3b0d130215a65d7aacbd064b5532 Author: Iain Sandoe Date: Fri

[Bug c++/100772] Templated coroutine new function's arguments have incorrect value categories/overload selection

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100772 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:921942a8a106cb53994c21162922e4934eb3a3e0 commit r12-6045-g921942a8a106cb53994c21162922e4934eb3a3e0 Author: Iain Sandoe Date: Sun

[Bug c++/100127] [coroutines] internal compiler error compiling promise with custom awaiter

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100127 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2466a8d0dd40d05cb4a239d7d4a21bbd9ffab698 commit r12-6046-g2466a8d0dd40d05cb4a239d7d4a21bbd9ffab698 Author: Iain Sandoe Date: Sat

[Bug c++/100772] Templated coroutine new function's arguments have incorrect value categories/overload selection

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100772 Iain Sandoe changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED CC|

[Bug c++/83264] std::initializer_list with a single element selects the wrong overload

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83264 --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely --- I don't know what the "right" behaviour is. I don't think any compiler except GCC actually implements 2137, as it causes problems. I'm not even sure if this is a case where 2137 applies!

[Bug c++/103358] what is the first constructor argument of lambda coroutine promise_type?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103358 Iain Sandoe changed: What|Removed |Added CC||iains at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 f

[Bug libstdc++/103755] {has,use}_facet() and iostream constructor performance

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103755 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- Created attachment 52024 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52024&action=edit Alternative implementation This seems like a much simpler approach. This causes 22_locale/ctype/is/string/8

[Bug ipa/103734] IPA-CP opportunity for imagick in SPECCPU 2017

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103734 pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c++/103754] [11,12][ice][modules] import bits/stdc++.h and map

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103754 --- Comment #5 from Egor Pugin --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3) > Sadly it looks like modules are no where near prime time. Seems so. I set up my tooling and trying to play with them, but there are a lot of issues. Does someone

[Bug c++/103758] New: bogus warning: misspelled term 'decl' in format; use 'declaration' instead [-Wformat-diag]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103758 Bug ID: 103758 Summary: bogus warning: misspelled term 'decl' in format; use 'declaration' instead [-Wformat-diag] Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/103758] bogus warning: misspelled term 'decl' in format; use 'declaration' instead [-Wformat-diag]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103758 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/103758] bogus warning: misspelled term 'decl' in format; use 'declaration' instead [-Wformat-diag]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103758 --- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek --- Incidentally, this error ("% invalid in condition"); in cp_parser_decl_specifier_seq should be adjusted as well.

[Bug target/103624] ICE: in extract_insn, at recog.c:2769 (error: unrecognizable insn)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103624 --- Comment #10 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Segher Boessenkool : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7194397966e6a007cee42360f96834377c3121a4 commit r12-6047-g7194397966e6a007cee42360f96834377c3121a4 Author: Segher Boessenkool

[Bug target/103624] ICE: in extract_insn, at recog.c:2769 (error: unrecognizable insn)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103624 --- Comment #11 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Segher Boessenkool : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:87ae8d7613a8b15d0d729b38ffd49153f1314799 commit r12-6048-g87ae8d7613a8b15d0d729b38ffd49153f1314799 Author: Segher Boessenkool

[Bug target/103624] ICE: in extract_insn, at recog.c:2769 (error: unrecognizable insn)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103624 Segher Boessenkool changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug libstdc++/103755] {has,use}_facet() and iostream constructor performance

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103755 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #52024|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug c++/102051] [coroutines] ICE in gimplify_var_or_parm_decl, at gimplify.c:2848

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102051 Iain Sandoe changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-12-17 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/103749] Misleading error message on template/non-template conflict

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103749 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:fae016862631da70e6482fe3173a111248f8b9bc commit r12-6049-gfae016862631da70e6482fe3173a111248f8b9bc Author: Marek Polacek Date: Th

[Bug c++/103749] Misleading error message on template/non-template conflict

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103749 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug tree-optimization/103759] New: [12 Regression] memcpy-chk failure for 32 bits

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103759 Bug ID: 103759 Summary: [12 Regression] memcpy-chk failure for 32 bits Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: t

[Bug tree-optimization/103759] [12 Regression] memcpy-chk failure for 32 bits

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103759 David Edelsohn changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/103758] bogus warning: misspelled term 'decl' in format; use 'declaration' instead [-Wformat-diag]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103758 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug tree-optimization/103759] [12 Regression] memcpy-chk failure for 32 bits

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103759 Siddhesh Poyarekar changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassi

[Bug c++/95949] mame build succeeds with -O3 but fails with -O2 and all -O3 flags added manually

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95949 --- Comment #11 from Julian Sikorski --- I can still reproduce this with mame master (0b418d65bae66baa9f334c6daa6dcb4148909f7f) and mingw-w64-x86_64-gcc 11.2.0-5.

[Bug tree-optimization/26854] Inordinate compile times on large routines

-linux-gnu Configured with: ../../gcc-mainline/configure --prefix=/pkgs/gcc-mainline --enable-checking=release --enable-languages=c --disable-multilib --enable-gather-detailed-mem-stats Thread model: posix Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib gcc version 12.0.0 20211217 (experimental) (GCC) I

[Bug middle-end/51446] -fno-trapping-math generates NaN constant with different sign

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51446 --- Comment #16 from lucier at math dot purdue.edu --- Created attachment 52026 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52026&action=edit CPU and Memorty usage reports for compilling all.i, _num.i, and compiler.i

[Bug middle-end/51446] -fno-trapping-math generates NaN constant with different sign

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51446 --- Comment #17 from lucier at math dot purdue.edu --- (In reply to lucier from comment #16) > Created attachment 52026 [details] > CPU and Memorty usage reports for compilling all.i, _num.i, and compiler.i Sorry, added comment to wrong PR.

[Bug tree-optimization/26854] Inordinate compile times on large routines

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26854 --- Comment #141 from lucier at math dot purdue.edu --- Created attachment 52027 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52027&action=edit CPU and Memorty usage reports for compilling all.i, _num.i, and compiler.i

[Bug c++/83264] std::initializer_list with a single element selects the wrong overload

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83264 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|1 |0 Resolution|INVALID

[Bug c++/103681] [9/10/11 Regression] Unusual behavior for tail padding with different c++ standards and NSDMI

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103681 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[9/10/11/12 Regression] |[9/10/11 Regression]

[Bug c++/92944] [concepts] redefinition error when using constrained structure template inside namespace

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92944 --- Comment #2 from Ed Catmur --- Sorry, meant to link this: https://quuxplusone.github.io/blog/2021/10/27/dont-reopen-namespace-std/

[Bug c++/103760] New: Invalid expression inside lambda inside compound requirement causes an error instead of concept satisfaction failure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103760 Bug ID: 103760 Summary: Invalid expression inside lambda inside compound requirement causes an error instead of concept satisfaction failure Product: gcc Version

[Bug libstdc++/103755] {has,use}_facet() and iostream constructor performance

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103755 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #3) > Created attachment 52025 [details] > Alternative implementation v2 > > The diagnostic regression is easy to fix with a static assertion before > calling __t

[Bug fortran/103412] [10/11/12 Regression] ICE: Invalid expression in gfc_element_size since r10-2083-g8dc63166e0b85954

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103412 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --

[Bug c++/103760] Invalid expression inside lambda inside compound requirement causes an error instead of concept satisfaction failure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103760 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid --- Comment #1 from Andre

[Bug tree-optimization/103759] [12 Regression] memcpy-chk failure for 32 bits

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103759 --- Comment #2 from Siddhesh Poyarekar --- I've posted a candidate fix: https://patchwork.sourceware.org/project/gcc/patch/20211217212347.72617-1-siddh...@gotplt.org/

[Bug fortran/103260] ICE in gfc_simplify_reshape, at fortran/simplify.c:6857 since r6-4614-g57e596204fceef2e

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103260 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug fortran/103610] ICE in gfc_convert_mpz_to_signed, at fortran/simplify.c:193

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103610 --- Comment #7 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a28d6903677629c23bac53ff061eb80f22d51006 commit r10-10346-ga28d6903677629c23bac53ff061eb80f22d51006 Author: Harald Anlauf

[Bug fortran/103260] ICE in gfc_simplify_reshape, at fortran/simplify.c:6857 since r6-4614-g57e596204fceef2e

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103260 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug fortran/103610] ICE in gfc_convert_mpz_to_signed, at fortran/simplify.c:193

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103610 --- Comment #8 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- *** Bug 103260 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug fortran/103610] ICE in gfc_convert_mpz_to_signed, at fortran/simplify.c:193

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103610 --- Comment #9 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1062d2b022575e2ab942236478029cd637f937a5 commit r9-9875-g1062d2b022575e2ab942236478029cd637f937a5 Author: Harald Anlauf Da

[Bug fortran/103610] ICE in gfc_convert_mpz_to_signed, at fortran/simplify.c:193

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103610 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug fortran/103590] ICE: find_array_spec(): Missing spec

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103590 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail||4.9.4 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug fortran/55824] [OOP] ICE with ALLOCATE and SOURCE= TRANSPOSE/RESHAPE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55824 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||7.1.0 Known to fail|

[Bug fortran/66907] Correct code produces "Segmentation fault - invalid memory reference"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66907 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||11.1.0 Known to fail|

[Bug fortran/77415] ICE: tree check: expected function_type or method_type, have pointer_type in create_function_arglist, at fortran/trans-decl.c:2263

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77415 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||10.1.0 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski

[Bug fortran/103412] [10/11/12 Regression] ICE: Invalid expression in gfc_element_size since r10-2083-g8dc63166e0b85954

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103412 --- Comment #5 from Steve Kargl --- On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 09:07:44PM +, anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > > --- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- > Alternative patch: > Either patch fixes the problem and I'll offer that the

[Bug c/103649] -Wno-attribute=foo::bar implies no arguments

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103649 --- Comment #1 from CVS Commits --- The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6afb8a68a9113897ccf39e40983e042ed90d7aed commit r12-6052-g6afb8a68a9113897ccf39e40983e042ed90d7aed Author: Marek Polacek Date: Th

  1   2   >