https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106825
Bug ID: 106825
Summary: header unit based std::shared_ptr<...>(...)
use gets: undefined reference to
`std::_Sp_counted_base<(__gnu_cxx::_Lock_policy)2>::_M
_relea
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105858
--- Comment #4 from Brecht Sanders
---
Any update on this issue?
I see performance complaints from several people in GCC12+MinGW-w64 being much
slower in the build without precompiled headers (see:
https://github.com/brechtsanders/winlibs_ming
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106819
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Aldy Hernandez from comment #7)
> ?? And if we keep NAN signs up to date, maybe just maybe, we can return a
> NAN from singleton_p() if we're sure about the sign. ISTM we should be able
> to pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106819
--- Comment #10 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Got it. Less work for me :-). Thanks for the explanation.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106819
--- Comment #11 from Aldy Hernandez ---
I'll just fix union and implement copysign folding and leave it at that.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105858
--- Comment #5 from Brecht Sanders
---
I believe this is issue is cause by the fact that mmap is missing on Windows.
In gcc/ggc-common.cc this causes use of default_gt_pch_get_address() as
HOST_HOOKS_GT_PCH_GET_ADDRESS which just returns NULL
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106824
--- Comment #1 from David Binderman ---
It seems that flag -O2 can be reduced to -O1 -fexpensive-optimizations.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106825
--- Comment #1 from Mark Millard ---
(In reply to Mark Millard from comment #0)
FYI: I also see this on FreeBSD via the lang/gcc12 port (that,
in my installed context, is at 12.2.0), using the default library:
libstdc++ .
I do not see any fail
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106825
--- Comment #2 from Mark Millard ---
An tiny example that avoids all involvement of libstdc++ is (showing
g++12 from FreeBSD in the comments, instead of c++ for fedora
--but both contexts fail):
# more module_template_specialization_failure.cpp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105667
Barnabás Pőcze changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pobrn at protonmail dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106825
--- Comment #3 from Mark Millard ---
(In reply to Mark Millard from comment #2)
. . .
> export module module_template_specialization_intf;
>
> export template int test();
> export template<> int test<0>() { return -1; };
> export template<
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106819
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #9)
> There are e.g. 2^23-1 different sNaNs and 2^23 different qNaNs in binary32
> format.
2^23-2 sNaNs actually ;)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106826
Bug ID: 106826
Summary: [modules] Variable template of type trait via
importable header gives wrong result
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105731
Kio changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|10.3.1 |11.2.1
--- Comment #6 from Kio ---
i just came a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106827
Bug ID: 106827
Summary: operator++ doesn't work for enum -O2
-mcpu=cortex-m0plus
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106825
--- Comment #4 from Mark Millard ---
(In reply to Mark Millard from comment #3)
. . .
> I'll also report that the tiny test also fails for clang++15
> (from FreeBSD's devel/llvm15 port)
. . .
Not true: I figured out that, for how the clang++15
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106827
--- Comment #1 from Kio ---
updated link at godbolt:
https://godbolt.org/z/5sf7cr9c3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106824
--- Comment #2 from David Binderman ---
After more than 13 hours of reduction, the C++ code seems to be:
using int32 = int;
using int64 = long;
float NoWeight___trans_tmp_2;
int ShortestPath_distance;
struct FloatWeightTpl {
FloatWeightTpl(fl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106814
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106824
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100136
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:20d30e737ad79dc36817e59f1676aa8bc0c6b325
commit r13-2397-g20d30e737ad79dc36817e59f1676aa8bc0c6b325
Author: José Rui Faustino de Sou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106762
--- Comment #2 from Matt Taylor ---
Yes, the test case is immensely reduced from the original code. However, there
are still three problems. First, the warning fails to note that the array
bounds _could_ be [0,0] and implies that they are _alway
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106762
--- Comment #3 from Matt Taylor ---
Actually one thing that I said before does not make sense. I said that the
analysis seems to allow a 1 byte write to NULL but not 2 or more. However, the
warning does not trigger if the offset of the field in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106828
Bug ID: 106828
Summary: cc1plus: warning: '-fsanitize=address' not supported
for this target for loongarch64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106828
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
The fix is to define the target hook for Asan address.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106640
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106406
--- Comment #4 from marshal ---
(In reply to marshal from comment #0)
> int main()
> {
> int i = 4;
> for (_Static_assert (3, "This is a three"); i < 7; i++) {
> i += 2;
> }
> }
>
>
> Gcc can build successfully, but it doe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106269
--- Comment #2 from marshal ---
(In reply to marshal from comment #0)
> #include
> #include
>
> void operator delete[]( void* ptr ) noexcept {
> std::cout << "delete with 1 parameters==" << std::endl;
> ::o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106829
Bug ID: 106829
Summary: OpenMP offload internal compiler error: in
gimplify_expr, at gimplify.cc:16222
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
-df-extra-amd64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 13.0.0 20220904 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106824
--- Comment #4 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Yeah, that's all me.
I can't reproduce on x86-64, but there's been a couple patches in this area
over the weekend. Could you double check again on an updated trunk?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106742
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Kong Lingling :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:092763fd0c069f3a7c05a65238d3815e8daab76b
commit r13-2400-g092763fd0c069f3a7c05a65238d3815e8daab76b
Author: konglin1
Date: Mon Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106824
--- Comment #5 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Aldy Hernandez from comment #4)
> Could you double check again on an updated trunk?
Problem seems to have gone away on today's trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106742
--- Comment #3 from kong lingling ---
Fixed in GCC13.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106824
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
35 matches
Mail list logo
