[Bug c++/114311] Possibly wrong "error: ‘this’ is not a constant expression" with consteval member function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114311 --- Comment #5 from Carlo Wood --- Hey Andrew :) You probably mean https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98752 But they are different in that I think that this report is invalid... See "discussion" here: https://stackoverflow.com/a/781427

[Bug c++/114311] Possibly wrong "error: ‘this’ is not a constant expression" with consteval member function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114311 --- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Carlo Wood from comment #5) > Hey Andrew :) > You probably mean https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98752 > But they are different in that I think that this report is invalid... > See "

[Bug c++/66108] incorrect cv-qualification deduction on conversion operator template

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66108 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_defects.html#349

[Bug c++/66108] [CWG 349] incorrect cv-qualification deduction on conversion operator template

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66108 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||94404 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug testsuite/114320] New test case in r14-9439-g4aa87b856067d4 fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114320 Kewen Lin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/114175] [13/14] RISC-V: Execution test failures on gcc.dg/c23-stdarg-6.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114175 Xi Ruoyao changed: What|Removed |Added CC||xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #20 f

[Bug target/114175] [13/14] RISC-V: Execution test failures on gcc.dg/c23-stdarg-6.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114175 --- Comment #21 from Sam James --- (In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #20) > Also failing on LoongArch. The testcase from comment 19 or the test? Not sure if we should move the comment 19 issue into its own PR?

[Bug target/114175] [13/14] RISC-V: Execution test failures on gcc.dg/c23-stdarg-6.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114175 --- Comment #22 from Xi Ruoyao --- (In reply to Sam James from comment #21) > (In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #20) > > Also failing on LoongArch. > > The testcase from comment 19 or the test? > > Not sure if we should move the comment 19 i

[Bug rtl-optimization/114261] [13/14 Regression] Scheduling takes excessive time (97%) since r13-5154-g733a1b777f1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114261 --- Comment #7 from Jeffrey A. Law --- Yea, there are various limits on the size of various lists the scheduler maintains. This looks independent of those various clamps.

[Bug rtl-optimization/64081] [11/12 Regression] r217828 prevents RTL loop unroll

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64081 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[11/12/13/14 Regression]|[11/12 Regression] r217828

[Bug ipa/114321] New: [11 regression] ipa/modref: incorrect result with O2 since r11-3308

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114321 Bug ID: 114321 Summary: [11 regression] ipa/modref: incorrect result with O2 since r11-3308 Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug ipa/114321] [11 regression] ipa/modref: incorrect result with O2 since r11-3308

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114321 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |INVALID Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug ipa/114321] [11 regression] ipa/modref: incorrect result with O2 since r11-3308

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114321 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- > does not clobber ref: ret alias sets: 46->46 Is specificly saying the function does not do any stores that would cause aliasing set 46 to change.

[Bug bootstrap/106472] No rule to make target '../libbacktrace/libbacktrace.la', needed by 'libgo.la'.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106472 --- Comment #36 from Дилян Палаузов --- > maybe this ought to be a `depend=` entry in Makefile.def instead? My understanding is that depend= only has effect for bootstrapped targets, and there is no boot_language=yes in gcc/go/config-lang.in.

[Bug testsuite/114307] [ARM] Vectorization tests not disabled for vector-less targets

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114307 Maxim Kuvyrkov changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mkuvyrkov at gcc dot gnu.org -

<    1   2