https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104651
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus ---
Additionally, for the following (from
gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/finalize_15.f90),
class(t1), allocatable :: x(:,:)
call fin_test_1(x(::2,::3))
with
subroutine fin_test_1(x)
class(t1), intent(out
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104655
Bug ID: 104655
Summary: [12 Regression] array subscript 0 is outside array
bounds of
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104644
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> Created attachment 52494 [details]
> gcc12-pr104644.patch
>
> Untested fix.
>
> The match.pd optimization relies on (bswap @1) actually being simplified
> int
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98500
friedkeenan at protonmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||friedkeenan at protonm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104655
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Can you provide the preprocessed source in all cases?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104645
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
So it's unhandled
:
if (i_3(D) != 0)
goto ; [INV]
else
goto ; [INV]
:
_4 = i_3(D) & 1;
iftmp.0_5 = (int) _4;
:
# iftmp.0_2 = PHI
return iftmp.0_2;
it also doesn't handle
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104647
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104644
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I think the FEs rely on such trees not being folded.
It is done in fold-const-call.cc,
1186static tree
1187fold_const_call_1 (combined_fn fn, tree type, tree arg)
1188{
1189 machine_mode mod
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104648
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104656
Bug ID: 104656
Summary: [12 Regression] trunk 20220222 ftbfs for bpf
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104595
--- Comment #10 from Kewen Lin ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #9)
> On Wed, 23 Feb 2022, linkw at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104595
> >
> > --- Comment #8 from Kewen Lin ---
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104651
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus ---
(In reply to kargl from comment #1)
> (In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #0)
> > Error: Rank mismatch in argument ‘x’ at (1) (rank-1 and rank-2)
> > Error: Rank mismatch in argument ‘y’ at (1) (rank-2 a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101636
--- Comment #15 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 52496
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52496&action=edit
GIMPLE testcase for the ICE
This is a GIMPLE testcase for the ICE:
> ./cc1 -quiet t2.c -O -fgimple -mavx512
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98341
--- Comment #16 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
Just as a heads-up: This has been fixed for me with gcc-12. I can successfully
bootstrap Ada in gcc-12 with gnat-10.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104657
Bug ID: 104657
Summary: array subscript 0 is outside array bounds
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98341
--- Comment #17 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Just as a heads-up: This has been fixed for me with gcc-12. I can
> successfully bootstrap Ada in gcc-12 with gnat-10.
Great. What about gcc-11?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104658
Bug ID: 104658
Summary: Inefficient vectorization using mask CTORs
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104658
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-02-23
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98341
--- Comment #18 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #17)
> > Just as a heads-up: This has been fixed for me with gcc-12. I can
> > successfully bootstrap Ada in gcc-12 with gnat-10.
>
> Great. What about g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104644
--- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 23 Feb 2022, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104644
>
> --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> I think the FEs rely on such trees not bei
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104657
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99578
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||christophm30 at gmail dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104656
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104655
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104659
Bug ID: 104659
Summary: msvcUsedUCRT in
libphobos/libdruntime/config/mingw/msvc.c
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104656
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|gcov-profile|target
--- Comment #1 from Richard Bie
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104655
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-02-23
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104660
Bug ID: 104660
Summary: Makefile.in has embedded dependencies of libatomic and
libbacktrace for libgo, causing GNU/Hurd build to
fail.
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104655
--- Comment #3 from Paul Menzel ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> I am 90% sure this is just another dup of bug 99578.
Are you sure, because the warnings/errors are not there with GCC 11.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104655
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104656
--- Comment #2 from Matthias Klose ---
yes, adding that option lets the build succeed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104633
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c8cb5098c7854a1ed07e85c6165ef0c348d6df1d
commit r12-7358-gc8cb5098c7854a1ed07e85c6165ef0c348d6df1d
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104656
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104655
--- Comment #5 from Paul Menzel ---
Created attachment 52498
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52498&action=edit
Preprocessed file `build/bootblock/cpu/x86/lapic/lapic.i` with `-save-temps`
Sorry for not sharing the file in t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101636
--- Comment #16 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6e80c4f1ad9046b0a7c105660cc7b3dcae0fdb8f
commit r12-7359-g6e80c4f1ad9046b0a7c105660cc7b3dcae0fdb8f
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104657
--- Comment #2 from Christoph Müllner ---
Thanks for referencing pr99578.
Based on the information there, I created the following workaround:
void foo(unsigned long v)
{
volatile unsigned long *p;
p = (volatile unsigned long*)8;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101636
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12 Regression] ICE: |[11 Regression] ICE:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104656
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
The ABI from the Linux kernel side needs to be documented that way.
So someone would need to propose that ABI change.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97338
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84958
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|nvptx |gcn
--- Comment #7 from Tom de Vries ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104633
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104655
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Paul Menzel from comment #5)
> Created attachment 52498 [details]
> Preprocessed file `build/bootblock/cpu/x86/lapic/lapic.i` with `-save-temps`
>
> Sorry for not sharing the file in the first
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104655
--- Comment #7 from Paul Menzel ---
Thank you for the analysis. Excuse my ignorance, but the referenced bug
(possible dup) says it’s a regression in GCC 11, but it does not show up here
with GCC 11. Are more issues tracked in bug 99578?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104661
Bug ID: 104661
Summary: Catching exception by const value when
exception-object has lvalue-reference constructor
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99578
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #24
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104656
Jose E. Marchesi changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jose.marchesi at oracle dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104662
Bug ID: 104662
Summary: arm: ice in simd_valid_immediate
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104644
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:fdc46830f1b793dc791099acfadc3f0f8cc24c0e
commit r12-7361-gfdc46830f1b793dc791099acfadc3f0f8cc24c0e
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104644
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104660
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ian at airs dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104434
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
On rereading
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Common-Function-Attributes.html
I think that "pure" isn't strong enough for the above example: the result of a
pure function is allowed to change between inv
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104663
Bug ID: 104663
Summary: A 50% C-Ray regression in GCC 12.0 for ADL at -O2
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81889
Jason Adams changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jasonadamses at protonmail dot
com
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103926
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-02-23
Status|UNCO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104601
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104601
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
But
--- gcc/tree-ssa-sccvn.cc.jj2022-02-11 00:19:22.432063254 +0100
+++ gcc/tree-ssa-sccvn.cc 2022-02-23 16:07:36.697893998 +0100
@@ -5218,7 +5218,11 @@ visit_reference_op_call (tree lhs, gcall
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104601
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
But:
--- gcc/tree-ssa-sccvn.cc.jj2022-02-11 00:19:22.432063254 +0100
+++ gcc/tree-ssa-sccvn.cc 2022-02-23 16:16:25.873557626 +0100
@@ -5218,7 +5218,11 @@ visit_reference_op_call (tree lhs, gcall
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103037
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
More reduced testcase - the min() obfuscation is to avoid recognizing a
MIN_EXPR before jump threading gets the chance to disrupt it. A GIMPLE unit
testcase for
PRE is difficult since we are not supporting
dcxx-pch
--prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-r12-7361-20220223135143-gfdc46830f1b-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-amd64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 12.0.1 20220223 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104601
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103407
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Rainer, is an executable linked against libstdc++.so.6.0.29 on Solaris 11.3
expected to work on an 11.4 machine with libstdc++.so.6.0.30?
With a #ifdef kluge in config/abi/pre/gnu.ver we can make the new
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104237
--- Comment #13 from Chengnian Sun ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10)
> Because -fcompare-debug tells the driver to compile the TU twice, once
> without and once with -gtoggle, and compare the result.
> So, if there is a difference
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103407
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Created attachment 52501
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52501&action=edit
Patch to fix abi-check on Solaris 11.3
This patch changes the version of the std::from_chars symbols from
G
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99578
--- Comment #25 from Martin Sebor ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #24)
> (In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #1)
> > The warning is by design.
>
> That just means the design is bad. Especially in the embedded world, using
> memor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104665
Bug ID: 104665
Summary: Failure to recognize memcpy
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104665
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Please include the full code here, including the #include directives. Not just
a link to godbolt.org.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103407
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This fixes the abi check FAIL on Solaris 11.3, I don't have access to 11.4 to
try it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104665
--- Comment #2 from monad at posteo dot net ---
The full code including headers is:
#include
#include
#include
void serialize_le(std::byte* __restrict dst, const std::uint32_t* __restrict
src)
{
for (int i = 0; i < 32; ++i, ++src)
{
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101246
--- Comment #7 from Lance Fredrickson ---
So this is the patch I'm using to build gccgo for uclibc arm.
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/lancethepants/tomatoware/master/patches/gcc/0006-fix-libgo-uclibc-ng.patch
In a seperate discussion you m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99578
--- Comment #26 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #25)
> In my opinion, code that deliberately uses invalid pointers (e.g., hardwired
> addresses) should be explicitly annotated, e.g., by some attribute. This
> approa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102485
Nicholas Piggin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||npiggin at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89408
Stephen Kell changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||srk31 at srcf dot ucam.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102485
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70077
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9675ecf7f9b340f93c68cf22280f5975a902
commit r12-7362-g9675ecf7f9b340f93c68cf22280f5975a902
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Wed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70077
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79493
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cdcea7c1ef6586bb1eb0144b741969748cbd780b
commit r12-7363-gcdcea7c1ef6586bb1eb0144b741969748cbd780b
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Wed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79493
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104655
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99578
--- Comment #27 from Martin Sebor ---
*** Bug 104655 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104666
Bug ID: 104666
Summary: [12 Regression] ICE in related_vector_mode, at
stor-layout.c:537
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104667
Bug ID: 104667
Summary: [10/11/12 Regression] ICE in
is_late_template_attribute, at cp/decl2.cc:1299
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104668
Bug ID: 104668
Summary: [12 Regression] ICE in lookup_attribute_spec, at
attribs.cc:425
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104669
Bug ID: 104669
Summary: [11/12 Regression] ICE in is_function_default_version,
at attribs.cc:1219
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104667
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-02-23
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104667
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104663
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
My bet is this is because the vectorizer is enabled now at -O2.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102976
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104657
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104515
--- Comment #4 from GBE ---
The commit that make this issue affect "basic types" as well:
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=gcc.git;h=e443d821386
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104619
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d86949f5f55dbe0eb6f3044366101605882cd58e
commit r11-9618-gd86949f5f55dbe0eb6f3044366101605882cd58e
Author: Harald Anlauf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104619
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:251061b82852bdebc6f13510b415ecb73a2f80ae
commit r10-10474-g251061b82852bdebc6f13510b415ecb73a2f80ae
Author: Harald Anlauf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104619
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASS
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89408
--- Comment #6 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
Case labels are required to be integer constant expressions. In most
cases where an integer constant expression is required, something that
isn't an integer constant expression but folds t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104668
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104669
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104670
Bug ID: 104670
Summary: ICE when using decltype of a lambda returning a struct
inside of a struct
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95082
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail|11.0|
Summary|[11] LE implementatio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104670
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to krzysio.kurek from comment #0)
> Compiled with `-std=c++20`
> Past stable releases of GCC report "confused by earlier errors, bailing out"
> without crashing instead.
Right. That means it was a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102953
--- Comment #25 from Andrew Cooper ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #24)
> (In reply to Andrew Cooper from comment #23)
> > Apologies for the delay, but I do now have a working prototype of Xen with
> > CET-IBT active, using the current ver
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103407
--- Comment #7 from Rainer Orth ---
EWRONGPATCH? I'll give it a whirl on both 11.3 and 11.4 then.
1 - 100 of 140 matches
Mail list logo
