https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111070
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
--- Comment #1 from D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111038
--- Comment #3 from Gejoe ---
Not sure of that..Will have to check.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102609
--- Comment #7 from waffl3x ---
struct S {
int f(this S*) {
return 5;
}
};
int main()
{
S s{};
return s.f();
}
Here is my current progress, this code works. I have a good feeling that the
rest is going to be easy. Excep
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105838
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107876
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102609
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I don't see anything forbidding that declaration, but I think it can only be
called if S& has an implicit conversion to S* because the object parameter is
an lvalue of type S, and so it can only match S* v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102609
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
If we're right about that, then I agree that a warning would be useful for
classes that have no such implicit conversion from S to S*.
I think the warning would give a false positive in the case below, so
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111069
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 55763
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55763&action=edit
gcc14-pr111069-wip.patch
WIP patch. Seems to get the basics right, but mangling of guard vars (_ZGV*)
and lif
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95130
--- Comment #19 from Julian Waters ---
(In reply to Tomas Kalibera from comment #17)
> (In reply to Tomas Kalibera from comment #16)
> > (In reply to Julian Waters from comment #15)
> > > It seems like the patch also doesn't fix the strftime case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111074
Bug ID: 111074
Summary: RISC-V: segmentation fault during RTL pass: vsetvl
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110932
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110932
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> So the general rule is:
> (simplify
> (eq:c @0 (convert (cmp @1 @2)))
> (if (bitwise_equal_p (@0, @1))
> (with {
> bool zeroalwaystrue = ...
> bool ze
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111075
Bug ID: 111075
Summary: ICE on g++.dg/torture/tail-padding1.C on darwin
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111075
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-apple-darwin20
Eve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102609
--- Comment #10 from Gašper Ažman ---
Yes, the explicit object parameter always receives the cv-l/r qualified
reference to the object of the call. Implicit conversions are then of
course allowed, same as any other parameter. S* is not that usefu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111065
--- Comment #6 from Tommy Murphy ---
Hi Kito/Palmer - should I maybe close this issue here and take it up in the
riscv-gnu-toolchain/riscv-gcc repos instead?
* https://github.com/riscv-collab/riscv-gnu-toolchain
* https://github.com/riscv-coll
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111076
Bug ID: 111076
Summary: RISC-V: segmentation fault during RTL pass: shorten
(debug build)
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111077
Bug ID: 111077
Summary: atomic_ref compare_exchange_strong doesn't properly
ignore padding bits
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95130
--- Comment #20 from Tomas Kalibera ---
(In reply to Julian Waters from comment #19)
> (In reply to Tomas Kalibera from comment #17)
> > (In reply to Tomas Kalibera from comment #16)
> > > (In reply to Julian Waters from comment #15)
> > > > It s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111077
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|libstdc++ |c++
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111077
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2018-December/060537.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111077
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c++ |libstdc++
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111077
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
reading through all of these discussions almost want to say the paper on
atomic_ref and padding bits of compare_and_exchange still missed the point of
this issue. Maybe this is undefined and maybe this is de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111067
--- Comment #2 from Francois-Xavier Coudert ---
I tried with:
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/opt/icf1.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/opt/icf1.C
index fbb275e635a..d4e4bbf91b9 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/opt/icf1.C
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106899
Mark Wielaard changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mark at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111077
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
See
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/libstdc++/2022-October/054899.html
Also
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111066
--- Comment #3 from Francois-Xavier Coudert ---
Makes sense, patch posted:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-August/627922.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111078
Bug ID: 111078
Summary: csneg is not used for (cset) * 2 - 1
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111078
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Another form:
```
int f1(int a, int b)
{
int t = a != b;
return (-t)|1;
}
```
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102609
--- Comment #11 from waffl3x ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #9)
> If we're right about that, then I agree that a warning would be useful for
> classes that have no such implicit conversion from S to S*.
>
> I think the warning wo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104042
--- Comment #5 from Francois-Xavier Coudert ---
Patch posted for Darwin at
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-August/627923.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111079
Bug ID: 111079
Summary: Failing to reject a defaulted/deleted local function
definition if it is a friend of a local class
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106677
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
On the trunk we now get:
_25 = SR.116_117 == 0;
_27 = (unsigned char) _25;
_32 = _27 | SR.116_117;
Rather than:
_119 = MAX_EXPR <1, SR.115_117>;
But we should instead just get:
SR.116_117 | 1
Thou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95130
--- Comment #21 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Yong :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:966f3c134bb4802ac7ba0517de4e8e3f6384cfa3
commit r14-3334-g966f3c134bb4802ac7ba0517de4e8e3f6384cfa3
Author: Tomas Kalibera
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100249
Jiang An changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||de34 at live dot cn
--- Comment #13 from Jia
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90835
--- Comment #35 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Eric Gallager :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9a5d1fceb86a61c9ead380df89ce3c4ba387d2e5
commit r14-3335-g9a5d1fceb86a61c9ead380df89ce3c4ba387d2e5
Author: Eric Gallager
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90835
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|egallager at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot
gnu.org
37 matches
Mail list logo
