https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110332
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #7)
Another one reduced C testcase, very similar to the previous one but slightly
more reduced:
```
_Bool a;
struct s { int t; } c, d;
unsigned e, f;
unsigned transfer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110360
--- Comment #2 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
For reference: testcase, cross-checked with NAG 7.1:
! { dg-do run }
! PR fortran/110360
program p
implicit none
character, allocatable :: ca
character, pointer :: cp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110224
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87477
Bug 87477 depends on bug 110224, which changed state.
Bug 110224 Summary: Rejects valid: function reference with data pointer result
as lhs in assignment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110224
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107900
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87477
Bug 87477 depends on bug 107900, which changed state.
Bug 107900 Summary: Select type with intrinsic type inside associate causes ICE
/ Segmenation fault
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107900
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88688
--- Comment #4 from Paul Thomas ---
Fixed on trunk and closing.
I will build a composite patch for 13-branch in a few weeks.
Thanks for the report
Paul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108961
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100650
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-06-21
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110340
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Full testcase for the first 2 issues raised in the paper:
```
int \\
u\
0\
3\
9\
1 = 0;
#define CONCAT(x,y) x##y
int CONCAT(\,u0393)=0;
```
Testcase for the last one:
```
const char * foo=" // { dg-error
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110360
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #55380|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110360
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88873
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110341
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I don't think there is anything to do for this paper:
`GCC exposes the same behavior(the one proposed by this paper) in all language
modes.`
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110346
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110348
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110341
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110337
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110252
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 110337 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110346
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Probably resolved by r14-1500-g4d935f52b0d5c0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101002
--- Comment #9 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #4)
> These die because the struct we're using to check the alignment of uses long
> double as the "big" aligned type. We could either disable the tests using a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110311
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Jürgen Reuter from comment #7)
> The problem seems really connected to optimization, if I compile our code
> with -g -O0 or -g -O1, everything works ok. Next, I will try to check why it
> is act
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106626
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0e466e978c728697f18c67c4eace9ba4633f9ef5
commit r14-2029-g0e466e978c728697f18c67c4eace9ba4633f9ef5
Author: David Malcolm
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110349
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110332
--- Comment #9 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> Either r14-1981 or r14-1951
Reverting r14-1981-g85107abeb71bbf restores llvm-12 build for me.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110342
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110344
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-06-22
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82943
Alexander Westbrooks changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ctechnodev at gmail dot com
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110332
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110118
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Roger Sayle :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5322f009e8f7d1c7a1c9aab7cb4c90c433398fdd
commit r14-2030-g5322f009e8f7d1c7a1c9aab7cb4c90c433398fdd
Author: Roger Sayle
Date: Thu J
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109973
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Roger Sayle :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5322f009e8f7d1c7a1c9aab7cb4c90c433398fdd
commit r14-2030-g5322f009e8f7d1c7a1c9aab7cb4c90c433398fdd
Author: Roger Sayle
Date: Thu
101 - 131 of 131 matches
Mail list logo
