Dear customer
My name is Liu Qi. nice to meet you. Xingwu Factory is a foundry from Hebei
Province, China, with a history of 28 years. The company produces nodular cast
iron and gray cast iron, and has three 2-ton electric furnaces with an annual
output of 2 tons of castings. Our factory mai
Dear customer
My name is Liu Qi. nice to meet you. Xingwu Factory is a foundry from Hebei
Province, China, with a history of 28 years. The company produces nodular cast
iron and gray cast iron, and has three 2-ton electric furnaces with an annual
output of 2 tons of castings. Our factory mai
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107151
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89997
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107151
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I think this is PR 100825
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107156
Bug ID: 107156
Summary: ice in lookup_attribute_by_prefix, at attribs.h:239
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107156
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||joseph at codesourcery dot com
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106698
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106698
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106679
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:233c966dba5012938a1f84e14c26b52d507b2aae
commit r13-3082-g233c966dba5012938a1f84e14c26b52d507b2aae
Author: Martin Liska
Date: Wed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106679
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107155
--- Comment #3 from Iain Sandoe ---
The discussion in the duplicate issue revolves around whether the header in the
sources was suitable (i.e. for something != cell).
The Apple header (which presumably does not have these contraints, since it w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107156
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107156
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106698
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:853ce8eea4ff97850a987167e603387b3d0f1401
commit r13-3084-g853ce8eea4ff97850a987167e603387b3d0f1401
Author: Eric Botcazou
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107156
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106698
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88443
Bug 88443 depends on bug 106698, which changed state.
Bug 106698 Summary: bogus -Wstringop-overflow warning on Ada code with LTO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106698
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107076
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|marxin at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107052
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Aldy Hernandez :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4c451631f722c9939260a5c2fc209802a47e525f
commit r13-3086-g4c451631f722c9939260a5c2fc209802a47e525f
Author: Aldy Hernandez
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107052
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107052
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Aldy Hernandez :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ae56d600d223e996054483d7d7033ec8e258d39d
commit r13-3085-gae56d600d223e996054483d7d7033ec8e258d39d
Author: Aldy Hernandez
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89997
--- Comment #3 from Mathias Stearn ---
Please reopen. It still seems to be broken with -std=c++20 as the only flag:
https://godbolt.org/z/bWMq4s6xb (trunk) https://godbolt.org/z/W3xWjWaGe (12.2)
Output:
: In function 'void test()':
:16:15: erro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107156
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0afa9dfb8fb3302db7f104add5654436927dcb56
commit r13-3088-g0afa9dfb8fb3302db7f104add5654436927dcb56
Author: Martin Liska
Date: Wed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107156
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89997
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|WORKSFORME |---
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89997
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107157
Bug ID: 107157
Summary: Weird out-of-bounds error with multiple move_alloc's
Product: gcc
Version: 12.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89997
--- Comment #6 from Mathias Stearn ---
> I think this is probably not concepts-specific, and just another variant of
> PR 49152.
Perhaps the busted pretty printer is a general problem, but at least in this
case I think the fix may be in concept
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107085
--- Comment #9 from Marek Polacek ---
A distilled test that ICEs with the patch:
struct X {
virtual void f();
};
struct Z : X {};
constexpr auto x = sizeof((X(Z(;
s.C:5:33: internal compiler error: in build_over_call, at cp/call.cc:9987
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107158
Bug ID: 107158
Summary: internal compiler error: in get_or_create_cluster, at
analyzer/store.cc:2832
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107158
--- Comment #1 from urs at akk dot org ---
Created attachment 53668
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53668&action=edit
internal compiler error: in get_or_create_cluster, at analyzer/store.cc:2832
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107139
cqwrteur changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104833
cqwrteur changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107085
--- Comment #10 from Marek Polacek ---
Even more simplified:
struct X {
virtual void f();
};
struct Z : X {};
constexpr X x = X(Z());
I guess we shouldn't try to force_elide X::X(X&&) here because X is a
potentially-overlapping subobject.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107000
--- Comment #22 from Steve Kargl ---
On Tue, Oct 04, 2022 at 09:20:33PM +, anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107000
>
> --- Comment #21 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> Submitted: https://gc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107159
Bug ID: 107159
Summary: x86_64-elf freestanding target should by default build
-mno-red-zone and -m32 multi-lib
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107160
Bug ID: 107160
Summary: [13 regression] r13-2641-g0ee1548d96884d causes
verification failure in spec2006
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107097
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #53667|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107097
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Seems in that case we loose the precision in:
#0 fold_convert_loc (loc=0, type=,
arg=) at ../../gcc/fold-const.cc:2436
#1 0x0049c414 in cxx_eval_constant_expression (ctx=0x7fffcc90,
t=, lval=vc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103109
--- Comment #3 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to HaoChen Gui from comment #2)
> Fixed by r13-2107.
This is marked version = GCC 12. Were you planning on backporting this?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107158
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107097
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Perhaps try to look up the implicit conversion using the semantic type (i.e.
with EXCESS_PRECISION_EXPR not stripped) and then if it is a standard
conversion (which exact?) from EXCESS_PRECISION to arithmeti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107161
Bug ID: 107161
Summary: gcc doesn't constant fold member if any other member
is mutable
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107161
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107060
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6832c95c0e1a58ba4d342ec002000f9d9d7db5ca
commit r13-3094-g6832c95c0e1a58ba4d342ec002000f9d9d7db5ca
Author: David Malcolm
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107158
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ef878564140cbcf23f479da88e07e5a996cec6bb
commit r13-3096-gef878564140cbcf23f479da88e07e5a996cec6bb
Author: David Malcolm
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106562
--- Comment #2 from Dimitar Dimitrov ---
With cbranchdi4 defined, the generated code is now 10 instructions:
test:
qbne.L5, r15, 0
qbeq.L4, r14, 0
.L5:
rsb r0, r16, 0
rsc r1, r17, 0
or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107158
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|internal compiler error: in |False postives from
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107060
--- Comment #8 from David Malcolm ---
The patch for PR analyzer/107072 and the above patch mean that we get more
reasonable summaries when using -fanalyzer-call-summaries. Unfortunately:
- it actually slows down the analysis for PR 107060 on my
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107162
Bug ID: 107162
Summary: -Wmisleading-indentation is blinded by comments
Product: gcc
Version: 12.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107163
Bug ID: 107163
Summary: Compile time regression when using templated base
classes, virtual method, and Wall
Product: gcc
Version: 11.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107163
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107163
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.5
Summary|Compile time re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107047
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=107158
--- Comment #5 from urs at akk dot org ---
Now (git @ e99dcbb54e07b798c3353124f38336f96a826d43; same $CFLAGS and source
file)
during IPA pass: analyzer
./makecfg.c: In function ‘parse_tbl’:
./makecfg.c:150:25: internal compiler error: in bind_ke
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107163
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Yes, using -std=gnu++14 makes GCC 11 as fast as GCC 8.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107000
--- Comment #23 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #22)
> In looking at the patch, there is a
>
>gcc_assert (op1->ts.type != BT_UNKNOWN);
>
> in reduce_binary_ac() near line 1334 and
>
>gcc_assert
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107164
Bug ID: 107164
Summary: No pedantic warning for declaration just referring to
a previously-declared enum type
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Ke
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107164
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
clang says it is a GCC extension:
:2:6: warning: redeclaration of already-defined enum 'E' is a GNU
extension [-Wgnu-redeclared-enum]
enum E;
^
:1:6: note: previous definition is here
enum E {a,b,c};
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55578
--- Comment #11 from Lewis Hyatt ---
(In reply to Vadim Zeitlin from comment #10)
> There definitely was a change in behaviour in gcc 11 because I had to make
> this change
>
> https://github.com/wxWidgets/wxWidgets/commit/
> 95c98a0b5ff71caca66
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107165
Bug ID: 107165
Summary: Downcasting in constexpr, error: "accessing value of
`...Derived::’ through a ‘Derived’ glvalue
in a constant expression"
Product: gcc
Ve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107165
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note since it was fixed in GCC 12.1.0 and it does not look like a regression,
this will be closed as fixed for GCC 12 after bisecting to the patch which
fixed it and the fix won't be backported to GCC 11.x.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103879
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||petr.azmanov at wartsila dot
com
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107165
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107166
Bug ID: 107166
Summary: "useless type name in empty declaration" diagnostic
may refer to wrong location
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55578
--- Comment #12 from Vadim Zeitlin ---
Thanks for looking at this! I'm happy to hear that the problem is fixed in
11.2, but I'm probably not going to change our code anyhow, especially as we're
going to finally drop support for C++98 very soon an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55578
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107166
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |minor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107166
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-10-06
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107167
Bug ID: 107167
Summary: It looks like GCC wastes registers on trivial
computations when result can be cached
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107167
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107167
--- Comment #2 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> This is a reassociation, scheduling issue and register allocation issue.
>
> Plus your example might be slower due to dependencies.
>
> Without a full example of wh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107167
--- Comment #3 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> This is a reassociation, scheduling issue and register allocation issue.
>
> Plus your example might be slower due to dependencies.
>
> Without a full example of wh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107167
--- Comment #4 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Plus your example might be slower due to dependencies.
Dependency is only an issue to a certain degree. 1st one it has things like
"movl%edi, %edx; rorl$11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107167
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107088
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5fc4d3e1837ea4850aac6460f563913f1d3fc5b8
commit r13-3105-g5fc4d3e1837ea4850aac6460f563913f1d3fc5b8
Author: Stefan Sc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103550
--- Comment #11 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 107167 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101670
--- Comment #3 from Fedor Chelnokov ---
A shorter example:
template concept x = true;
void foo(x auto) {}
Online demo: https://godbolt.org/z/sT74G8crE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107129
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||88443
Target Milestone|---
80 matches
Mail list logo
