https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114874
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ryan.mulhall at noaa dot gov
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115138
--- Comment #20 from Iain Buclaw ---
Stepping through both the stage1-gcc/gdc and stage2-gcc/gdc compilers, there is
an apparent divergence in behaviour at this point in gimplify.cc
6527│ /* Now that the LHS is gimplified, re-gimplify the RH
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115191
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target Milestone|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115188
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110415
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2ebf3af1f84d54fbda172eff105a8842c685d11d
commit r13-8793-g2ebf3af1f84d54fbda172eff105a8842c685d11d
Author: Andrew Jenner
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114827
--- Comment #15 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f0b88ec4ae829798cb533618f781ca467bab6b9b
commit r13-8794-gf0b88ec4ae829798cb533618f781ca467bab6b9b
Author: Harald Anlauf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110415
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.4
--- Comment #8 from anl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115038
--- Comment #11 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2f0e0862406a17bb8bf4ad948ae22916bae092a0
commit r14-10233-g2f0e0862406a17bb8bf4ad948ae22916bae092a0
Author: Eric Botcazou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115038
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114827
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115138
--- Comment #21 from Iain Buclaw ---
Now doing a fair comparison:
Command:
g++-11 -std=c++11 \
-fno-PIE -c -O3 -g -fno-checking -DIN_GCC -fno-exceptions \
-fno-rtti -fasynchronous-unwind-tables \
-W -Wall -Wno-narrowing -Wwrite-strings
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115195
Bug ID: 115195
Summary: [12 Regression] Segfault when instantiating template
Product: gcc
Version: 12.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115195
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I think this is a dup of bug 114303.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115195
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109241
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||patrick at rivosinc dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115195
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109241#c5 is a reduced version of
comment #0 here.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115195
--- Comment #4 from Patrick O'Neill ---
Thanks Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115196
Bug ID: 115196
Summary: Bad error message when using library functions from
versions before they were introduced
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107800
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||luigighiron at gmail dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115196
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115196
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
See r14-10227-g5b96d547ce71b8.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115196
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
You seem to imply it's a general problem, but I think it's specific to
sd::to_address, and that's already fixed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102171
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1d1ef1c22752b3e250ee769ae6d79f537471a57f
commit r15-778-g1d1ef1c22752b3e250ee769ae6d79f537471a57f
Author: Pengxuan Zheng
Date: Tu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102171
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95958
Bug 95958 depends on bug 102171, which changed state.
Bug 102171 Summary: vget_low_*/vget_high_* intrinsics should become
BIT_FIELD_REF during gimple
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102171
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115196
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Halalaluyafail3 from comment #0)
> This note doesn't seem to be very helpful, it mentions adding an extra
> '#include' when one is already present. A better error message here
> would be to om
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57025
--- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Alan Coopersmith from comment #11)
> While Solaris 11.3 support has been dropped from gcc now, Jonathan Perkins
> from pkgsrc found that just removing the definition of __STDC_VERSION__
> didn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115196
--- Comment #5 from Halalaluyafail3 ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #4)
> (In reply to Halalaluyafail3 from comment #0)
> > This note doesn't seem to be very helpful, it mentions adding an extra
> > '#include' when one is already p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115191
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115191
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115191
--- Comment #6 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> Confirmed.
>
> /* After the optimization PHI result can have value
> which it couldn't have previously. */
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115191
--- Comment #7 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Created attachment 58272
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58272&action=edit
patch in testing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115191
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115187
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> clang complains:
>
> t.ii:3:7: error: cannot delete expression of type 'T' (aka 'int[2]')
> 3 | delete T{};
> | ^ ~~~
But that mig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115187
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|accepts-invalid,|
|ice-on-invalid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115189
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Host||*-*-mingw
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pi
: zlib
gcc version 15.0.0 20240522 (experimental) (GCC)
[521] %
[521] % gcctk -O1 -fno-tree-scev-cprop -ftree-pre
-ftree-loop-distribute-patterns small.c
during GIMPLE pass: ldist
small.c: In function ‘main’:
small.c:2:5: internal compiler error: tree check: expected tree that contains
‘de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115198
Bug ID: 115198
Summary: Class template argument deduction fails for copy ctor
when used with an alias template if the aliased class
template has explicitly defaulted copy ctor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115198
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL|https://sigcpp.godbolt.org/ |
|z/jjGT8hK8d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115199
Bug ID: 115199
Summary: [15 regression] gettext (libtextstyle) testsuite
miscompiled
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115199
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
--- Comment #1 from Sam James -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115199
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
>From an earlier version:
"""
[22:12] sam_: first difference that matters is between
foo-{good,bad}-foo.c.122t.dse2
[22:12] _9 = __builtin_malloc (4);
[22:12] - _10 = __builtin_memcpy (_9, "foo", 4);
[22:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115199
--- Comment #3 from Kacper Słomiński ---
For the version in the bug report the first bad diff is:
--- foo-good-foo.c.044t.dse12024-05-22 23:22:35.962903496 +0200
+++ foo-bad-foo.c.044t.dse1 2024-05-22 23:22:23.869476999 +0200
@@ -11,7 +
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115199
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115159
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3c98d06a9016a0fa3a806879bd168f13b8a606f8
commit r15-779-g3c98d06a9016a0fa3a806879bd168f13b8a606f8
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: We
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115199
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115159
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115198
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115198
--- Comment #3 from Sean Murthy ---
For everyone's convenience, attaching here the compiler's error message. The
notes the compiler attached to the error indicate the issue might be with a
possibly erroneous/superfluous deduction guide the compi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115198
--- Comment #4 from Sean Murthy ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> Confirmed.
Thank you for confirming the issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114983
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Marek Polacek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c27d6c7fd03f95483d372eae2c96912ceee98a5e
commit r14-10235-gc27d6c7fd03f95483d372eae2c96912ceee98a5e
Author: Marek Polacek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114983
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114940
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b2fdd508d7e63158e9d2a6dd04f901d02900def3
commit r15-780-gb2fdd508d7e63158e9d2a6dd04f901d02900def3
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108323
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:947a9c801e818f412ad4c669a49297c3512b3a6e
commit r15-781-g947a9c801e818f412ad4c669a49297c3512b3a6e
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115187
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
Assignee|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115200
Bug ID: 115200
Summary: [modules] ICE in declare_module() with unclosed
namespace scope before module perview
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115125
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Nikolai Ivanenko from comment #1)
> Forgot to mention that the the code commented out in main compiles without
> warnings.
That is just due to inlining differences. Afterwards if you rename mai
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115125
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||15.0
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115104
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-05-22
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115100
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
>This has been true since wide-int branch was merged in back in 2014.
Actually older than that. I had missed understood the diff there. But still not
documented.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115201
Bug ID: 115201
Summary: Recursive binary search is incorrectly inlined
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115201
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |ipa
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115201
--- Comment #2 from Jeremy R. ---
Does recursive inlining here interfere with TCO, or is GCC just not able to TCO
in this case?
I can understand why some bounded recursive inlining may be desirable, however
in this case it seems very not ideal.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115201
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Oh the issue is the iterator is a struct which confuses things ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115201
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 58273
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58273&action=edit
Better (reduced testcase)
The tail call happens in the foo2 case while not in foo1. This is due to struct
retu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115201
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115201
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 58274
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58274&action=edit
Slightly more reduced
Slightly more reduced, foo3 should produce the same as foo4.
Basically Tailr does not h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115201
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||FIXME
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115201
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #7)
> /* The parameter should be a real operand, so that phi node
>created for it at the start of the function has the meaning
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111949
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100611
--- Comment #10 from vipcxj at 126 dot com ---
The gcc version in build-essential for ubuntu22 is 11.4. The latest gcc in
ubuntu22 is 12.3. The latest gcc in ppa:ubuntu-toolchain-r/test is 13.1. To use
gcc 13.2.1, we have to compile it from sourc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115081
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115010
--- Comment #15 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Thorsten Otto from comment #14)
> A bisect between 10.0.0 and 11.4.0 for the 2nd testcase gave me this commit:
>
> commit 512c6ba04102295fccc62a173ee0086ca733c920
> From: Richard Biener
> Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115010
--- Comment #16 from Thorsten Otto ---
Yes, i'm just curious what that "latent bug" might be.
It might not have to do directly with that __builtin_mul_overflow() at all,
because when using -m68060, library calls to __mulsi3() are used to avoid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59104
--- Comment #5 from Paul Thomas ---
Created attachment 58275
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58275&action=edit
"Fix" for this PR
This patch causes regressions in dependent_decls_1.f90 and mapping_[1,2].f90.
However, it demon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86358
--- Comment #3 from Boris Kolpackov ---
Still the case as of GCC 14.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115029
Hu Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lin1.hu at intel dot com
--- Comment #3 from H
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104678
--- Comment #3 from Saurav Yadav <3y3p4tch at protonmail dot com> ---
CCing C++ Front End maintainers. Please check and assign this accordingly.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115191
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Aldy Hernandez :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:35a293a6454ac0cd88735036f536d8f4ec65951a
commit r15-785-g35a293a6454ac0cd88735036f536d8f4ec65951a
Author: Aldy Hernandez
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115191
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105359
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Alexandre Oliva :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:dbdddc92a3b955fce71af47755c226132559eda2
commit r15-786-gdbdddc92a3b955fce71af47755c226132559eda2
Author: Alexandre Oliva
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109549
--- Comment #19 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:57e04879389f9c0d5d53f316b468ce1bddbab350
commit r15-787-g57e04879389f9c0d5d53f316b468ce1bddbab350
Author: Stefan Sch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115187
--- Comment #5 from Mital Ashok ---
PR94264 prevented the first version from being an issue in GCC13, but the
second version
struct X { int x[2]; };
void f() {
delete X{}.x;
}
still crashed in older GCC versions. This isn't t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115189
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||13.3.0
Known to work|
101 - 184 of 184 matches
Mail list logo
