[Bug c++/107532] [13 Regression] -Werror=dangling-reference false positives in libcamera-0.0.1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107532 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Assignee|unassigned at gcc

[Bug rust/107633] [13 regression] Bootstrap failure due to -Werror=unused-parameter and -Werror=dangling-reference

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107633 --- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek --- https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-November/605800.html, if accepted, should help.

[Bug analyzer/107648] New: RFE: add an attribute for indicating security-sensitive data

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107648 Bug ID: 107648 Summary: RFE: add an attribute for indicating security-sensitive data Product: gcc Version: 13.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/105300] [10/11/12/13 Regression] segfault from static_assert with user-defined string suffix argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105300 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug libstdc++/107649] New: New std::complex specializations are never used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107649 Bug ID: 107649 Summary: New std::complex specializations are never used Product: gcc Version: 13.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug libstdc++/107649] New std::complex specializations are never used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107649 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2022-11-11 Status|UNCONFI

[Bug web/107650] New: Sphinx generated web pages don't have up (to the section index)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107650 Bug ID: 107650 Summary: Sphinx generated web pages don't have up (to the section index) Product: gcc Version: 13.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: documentation

[Bug libstdc++/107649] New std::complex specializations are never used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107649 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- Although if the _GLIBCXX_FLOAT_IS_IEEE_BINARY32 macro is not defined, it will still be ambiguous, because we won't define these overloads: #if _GLIBCXX_USE_C99_COMPLEX #if defined(__STDCPP_FLOAT16_T__) &&

[Bug web/107650] Sphinx generated web pages don't have up (to the section index)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107650 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- The side bar has issues with the text being so much bigger and popping out compared to the main text. Plus when I scroll it, the search and icon part just takes up so much of it, the side bar becomes not ver

[Bug web/107651] New: Having two different kind of indexes is very useful still

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107651 Bug ID: 107651 Summary: Having two different kind of indexes is very useful still Product: gcc Version: 13.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: documentation

[Bug analyzer/106147] RFE: -fanalyzer could complain about some cases of infinite loops and infinite recursion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106147 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:12c583a2a3da798e82737c2d0e11fd686636cfeb commit r13-3912-g12c583a2a3da798e82737c2d0e11fd686636cfeb Author: David Malcolm Date: F

[Bug c++/107652] New: c++20 gccchoses incorrect operator== overload

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107652 Bug ID: 107652 Summary: c++20 gccchoses incorrect operator== overload Product: gcc Version: 13.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c+

[Bug web/107651] Having two different kind of indexes is very useful still

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107651 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- For the install page, one index should be index of configure option and another one will be of the env variables. For the preprocessor has an index of env variables too. Maybe even in the main document you

[Bug c/107653] New: how-to-use-inline-assembly-language-in-c-code page is huge and should be split up

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107653 Bug ID: 107653 Summary: how-to-use-inline-assembly-language-in-c-code page is huge and should be split up Product: gcc Version: 13.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywor

[Bug analyzer/106147] RFE: -fanalyzer could complain about some cases of infinite loops and infinite recursion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106147 --- Comment #6 from David Malcolm --- The above patch implements -Wanalyzer-infinite-recursion for GCC 13. I also have the beginnings of an implementation of -Wanalyzer-infinite-loop, but it won't be ready for the close of GCC 13 stage 1. Keep

[Bug middle-end/107654] New: [13 Regression] md.rst should be in gcc/doc and not in doc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107654 Bug ID: 107654 Summary: [13 Regression] md.rst should be in gcc/doc and not in doc Product: gcc Version: 13.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: documentation

[Bug middle-end/107654] [13 Regression] md.rst should be in gcc/doc and not in doc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107654 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |13.0

[Bug middle-end/107654] [13 Regression] md.rst should be in gcc/doc and not in doc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107654 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- cppdiropts.rst cppenv.rst cppopts.rst cppwarnopts.rst Also maybe should not be in the toplevel directory. Maybe place them in libcpp instead?

[Bug fortran/107576] [10/11/12/13 Regression] ICE in gfc_conv_procedure_call, at fortran/trans-expr.cc:6193

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107576 --- Comment #3 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- I am still wondering if this is really invalid code. null(z) has the same characteristics as z, see F2018:16.9.144 So is there really a mismatch of arguments? Second, just one observation: since

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103755 seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||seurer at gcc dot gnu.org --

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103755 --- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely --- As I said in Bug 107632 comment 2: I'm kinda tempted to just disable the new optimization on these targets, the handling of compat facets for different float ABIs is impossible to get right.

[Bug fortran/107576] [10/11/12/13 Regression] ICE in gfc_conv_procedure_call, at fortran/trans-expr.cc:6193

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107576 --- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- Partial fix: diff --git a/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.cc b/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.cc index b95c5cf2f96..f09fad337bc 100644 --- a/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.cc +++ b/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.cc @@ -6193,6 +6

[Bug libstdc++/95048] [10/11/12 Regression] wstring-constructor of std::filesystem::path throws for non-ASCII characters

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95048 --- Comment #21 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8214ec0cf33482f60139ae18a40567317e63c1ff commit r13-3915-g8214ec0cf33482f60139ae18a40567317e63c1ff Author: Jonathan Wakely Date:

[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 CC|jwakely.gcc at gmail dot com | --- Comment #12 from Jonathan

[Bug other/107655] New: [meta-bug] tracker bug for issues encountered in the texinfo-to-sphinx migration

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107655 Bug ID: 107655 Summary: [meta-bug] tracker bug for issues encountered in the texinfo-to-sphinx migration Product: gcc Version: 13.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keyword

[Bug middle-end/107656] New: post sphinx conversion, can't tell between a target macro or a target hook

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107656 Bug ID: 107656 Summary: post sphinx conversion, can't tell between a target macro or a target hook Product: gcc Version: 13.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: doc

[Bug middle-end/107656] post sphinx conversion, can't tell between a target macro or a target hook

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107656 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- .. c:macro:: PROMOTE_MODE (m, unsignedp, type) .. function:: enum flt_eval_method TARGET_C_EXCESS_PRECISION (enum excess_precision_type type) It is really hard to tell the difference in the generated page

[Bug middle-end/107657] New: PROMOTE_MODE, TARGET_PROMOTE_FUNCTION_MODE, TARGET_FUNCTION_VALUE and TARGET_PROMOTE_FUNCTION_MODE should describe better their interactions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107657 Bug ID: 107657 Summary: PROMOTE_MODE, TARGET_PROMOTE_FUNCTION_MODE, TARGET_FUNCTION_VALUE and TARGET_PROMOTE_FUNCTION_MODE should describe better their interactions Product

[Bug c++/107652] c++20 gccchoses incorrect operator== overload

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107652 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug other/107634] Very long filenames and URLs for sphinx-based docs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107634 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- I came across a related issue here: Take: https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-12.2.0/gccint/C_002b_002b-ABI.html The original section name was just C++-ABI but had a heading of C++ ABI parameters Now post sp

[Bug other/107634] Very long filenames and URLs for sphinx-based docs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107634 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- One of the biggest drawbacks of not having one file is when you need to add a new section, you have to add a new file/directory rather than edditing one file. I also noticed the splitting up sections of the

[Bug middle-end/107658] New: TARGET_EXPAND_TO_RTL_HOOK, TARGET_INSTANTIATE_DECLS, TARGET_MANGLE_TYPE don't really belong in the Storage Layout target hook section

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107658 Bug ID: 107658 Summary: TARGET_EXPAND_TO_RTL_HOOK, TARGET_INSTANTIATE_DECLS, TARGET_MANGLE_TYPE don't really belong in the Storage Layout target hook section Product: gcc

[Bug c/107653] how-to-use-inline-assembly-language-in-c-code page is huge and should be split up

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107653 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- I thought it went one layer deap but nope it is kinda of random. For an example: Not split up: https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint/target-macros/register-classes.html Splitted up: https://gcc.gnu.org/onli

[Bug c/107653] how-to-use-inline-assembly-language-in-c-code page is huge and should be split up

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107653 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > I thought it went one layer deap but nope it is kinda of random. > For an example: > Not split up: > https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint/target-macros/register

[Bug fortran/107659] New: C procedure with no global scope is seen as global

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107659 Bug ID: 107659 Summary: C procedure with no global scope is seen as global Product: gcc Version: 10.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compon

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103755 --- Comment #13 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a7f51059fb009dcd7d491d6b2164bce75dbd9975 commit r13-3917-ga7f51059fb009dcd7d491d6b2164bce75dbd9975 Author: Jonathan Wakely Date

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103755 --- Comment #14 from Jonathan Wakely --- Should be fixed now, I think

[Bug sanitizer/64234] Statically sanitized executable does not export ASan symbols

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64234 --- Comment #8 from lo1ol --- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ua3TiOSwVTI

[Bug c++/107660] New: Running binaries compiled with g++11 or later produces different results than g++ version 10 or earlier

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107660 Bug ID: 107660 Summary: Running binaries compiled with g++11 or later produces different results than g++ version 10 or earlier Product: gcc Version: 12.2.0 Status: UNCO

[Bug c++/97452] [coroutines] incorrect sequencing of await_resume() when multiple co_await expressions occur in a single statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97452 --- Comment #11 from David Ledger --- This did not occur with GCC 10.2, it started in GCC 10.3: 10.3 (https://godbolt.org/z/jrdv31M17): ``` 0x15d1ed3 A 0x15d1ed2 ~A 0x15d1ed3 ~A ``` 10.2 (https://godbolt.org/z/rrvKh9h6K): ``` 0x2322ed1 A 0x2322

[Bug c++/107660] Running binaries compiled with g++11 or later produces different results than g++ version 10 or earlier

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107660 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2022-11-12 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug c++/107660] Running binaries compiled with g++11 or later produces different results than g++ version 10 or earlier

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107660 --- Comment #2 from Tomoya Suzuki --- I Sorry I didn't follow your bug report guidelines. After this, I investigated the cause by myself, and it seems that there is a difference in the output of the std::shuffle function. Even if the input and r

[Bug c++/107660] Running binaries compiled with g++11 or later produces different results than g++ version 10 or earlier

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107660 --- Comment #3 from Tomoya Suzuki --- Perhaps I should ask the question in libc instead of gcc?

<    1   2