https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120160
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jiang An from comment #1)
> `import std;` in every header looks too heavy to me. IMO it's undesired to
> import std::cin and its friends from .
If you're thinking about the global static init
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115645
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #10)
> I'm a little nervous about backporting this one.
Fine - you know more about this than me ;)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120278
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10/11/12/13/14/15|[12/13/14/15 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120279
Bug ID: 120279
Summary: Missed DCE for __builtin_{clzg,ctzg} when bitshift
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120139
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Thomas Koenig :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4f9c7b5258f2af89bba8e954c277981d2e2ee1ef
commit r16-638-g4f9c7b5258f2af89bba8e954c277981d2e2ee1ef
Author: Thomas Koenig
Date: We
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120278
Bug ID: 120278
Summary: [9/10/11/12/13/14/15 Regression] Switch expansion
generates extra compares with -fno-jump-tables
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120107
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Thomas Koenig :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:fa0dff8e99e81bc7a3db1dc57d4fc340e0525b1d
commit r16-637-gfa0dff8e99e81bc7a3db1dc57d4fc340e0525b1d
Author: Thomas Koenig
Date: Tu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120278
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99832
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The addition to c++config.h works need to be before os_defines.h is included.
But as I said I'm comment 2, I don't think either of the suggestions in comment
1 works. IIRC the way glibc ended up doing the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120278
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|missed-optimization |
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99832
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
https://inbox.sourceware.org/libc-alpha/88fdef1f-66fc-48d1-a2a4-7e719711a...@linaro.org/
Maybe there is a way, I'll revisit this and look at what current glibc does.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58091
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120266
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I suspect the reason for new warnings is just that GCC got better at LTO, so
started to see the conflicting (but ABI-compatible) definitions of the
exception classes. Those conflicting definitions have bee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67990
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Ah yes, thanks!
Since this is unlikely to get fixed in libstdc++ any time soon, and is
permitted by POSIX locales, maybe we should just close this as WONTFIX.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120267
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-05-14
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120266
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Building libstdc++ with LTO is not supported. If you want to do that, you get
to keep the pieces when it breaks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120266
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120274
Bug ID: 120274
Summary: internal compiler error: in tsubst_expr, at
cp/pt.cc:21618 since clang 10 using -std=c++20
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120125
--- Comment #10 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Nathaniel Shead
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6b1a99c3e2cf0fb858ad42b19c6834f7593f091d
commit r14-11775-g6b1a99c3e2cf0fb858ad42b19c6834f7593f091d
Author: Nathaniel S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120225
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:aac78fde6aa6ae829679355bc2a65bcadd834e6f
commit r16-608-gaac78fde6aa6ae829679355bc2a65bcadd834e6f
Author: Tobias Burnus
Date: We
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120272
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120266
--- Comment #2 from Quentin Boswank ---
Toolchain is build under https://github.com/QBos07/CP-dockercross and
distributed as a docker image under ghcr.io/qbos07/cp-dockercross (build log
under /toolchain/build.log.bz2) the app in question is
htt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120272
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||13.2.0
Summary|ICE in get_lo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120225
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c91c226762b422c3c310227e26f9390f93fe9f4d
commit r16-607-gc91c226762b422c3c310227e26f9390f93fe9f4d
Author: Tobias Burnus
Date: We
://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120129, as it happens
since 11.3 also, but stack is totally different and internal error arises in a
different location:
```
#include
int main()
{
decltype(auto) values = {1, 2, 3, 4};
values.size()
}
```
```
opt/compiler-explorer/gcc-trunk-20250514
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120276
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||16.0
Target Milestone|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119012
--- Comment #24 from Levi Zim ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #23)
> (In reply to Levi Zim from comment #11)
> > It comes with a similar pattern that .gnu.lto_.jmpfuncs.1 is the most
> > different section ignoring offset differences and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120283
Bug ID: 120283
Summary: `Transform comparisons of the form X +- C1 CMP C2 to X
CMP C2 -+ C1` gimple depends on single use
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120283
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120282
Bug ID: 120282
Summary: -Warray-bounds triggered incorrectly
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120266
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |---
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120098
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117287
--- Comment #13 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Andrew Macleod
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:dce408e28c416f3a34f487e4f8bb2a1e1e586c69
commit r13-9657-gdce408e28c416f3a34f487e4f8bb2a1e1e586c69
Author: Andrew MacLeo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117287
Andrew Macleod changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|REOPENED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120266
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108630
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||qubos at outlook dot de
--- Comment #7 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120283
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> I forgot to say this comes from gcc.dg/tree-ssa/vrp89.c
and gcc.dg/tree-ssa/vrp93.c .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120280
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
The full list of failures due to this missing optimization:
gcc.dg/tree-ssa/vrp12.c
gcc.dg/tree-ssa/vrp60.c
gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr20139.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120283
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Seems like many of the single use with respect to comparisons need to be all
relooked into as they are mostly ignored for forwprop in many cases.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88643
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ncahill_alt at yahoo dot com
--- Comment #16
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51859
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120125
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathaniel Shead :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d787bc4fd372298e9ed5b11cb3050fd3707070f6
commit r16-613-gd787bc4fd372298e9ed5b11cb3050fd3707070f6
Author: Nathaniel Shead
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119864
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathaniel Shead :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:79b7e37ea3fbbc43958190f69f6da3be3d809c9c
commit r16-612-g79b7e37ea3fbbc43958190f69f6da3be3d809c9c
Author: Nathaniel Shead
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120125
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-15 branch has been updated by Nathaniel Shead
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6dfc5d1fc86fe6aaed6e7c476286f7a5f0ffc867
commit r15-9681-g6dfc5d1fc86fe6aaed6e7c476286f7a5f0ffc867
Author: Nathaniel She
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119864
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-15 branch has been updated by Nathaniel Shead
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:53690a84a35b905403126be66210d21e89f53ac6
commit r15-9680-g53690a84a35b905403126be66210d21e89f53ac6
Author: Nathaniel She
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120273
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120273
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
The strange "in pp_string, at pretty-print.cc:2655" is not a copy/paste error,
btw.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120273
Bug ID: 120273
Summary: [15/16 regression] ICE when building corral
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: c++-coroutines, ice-on-valid-code
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120273
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 61422
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61422&action=edit
z.ii
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120273
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> Are you sure it is valid code because the ice is while trying to print out
> an error message.
Actually it is while printing out the ice.
>From splay_tree_splay
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120273
--- Comment #4 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> Are you sure it is valid code because the ice is while trying to print out
> an error message.
Absolutely not sure ;)
With 14, it hangs.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120273
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Are you sure it is valid code because the ice is while trying to print out an
error message.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119125
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tomasz Kaminski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:708d40ff109c6e49d02b684a368571722a160af8
commit r16-617-g708d40ff109c6e49d02b684a368571722a160af8
Author: Tomasz KamiÅski
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120277
Bug ID: 120277
Summary: Crash at -O2: in upper_bound, at value-range.h:1181
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119125
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tomasz Kaminski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0e93f7cd4ed0cf6bcfda90ed4dcad51a1f65b4b6
commit r16-618-g0e93f7cd4ed0cf6bcfda90ed4dcad51a1f65b4b6
Author: Tomasz KamiÅski
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119844
--- Comment #4 from Nathaniel Shead ---
(In reply to printfne from comment #3)
> Thank you for the solution you proposed. It is indeed very useful. Besides,
> I want to know if the C++ standard has any regulations on the symbols
> exported in th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120160
Nathaniel Shead changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nshead at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120215
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f0d36c822c8b0918583c6bc3b1db01f2bb7f226b
commit r16-619-gf0d36c822c8b0918583c6bc3b1db01f2bb7f226b
Author: liuhongt
Date: Tue Dec 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120215
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119125
Tomasz Kamiński changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119125
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tomasz Kaminski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d9055d010475fa1c624d6036881eee9c37034b21
commit r16-620-gd9055d010475fa1c624d6036881eee9c37034b21
Author: Tomasz KamiÅski
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120266
--- Comment #6 from Quentin Boswank ---
Why does LTO even exists when I can use it to its full potential. I might not
use it like this. /rant
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110339
Bug 110339 depends on bug 119125, which changed state.
Bug 119125 Summary: [C++26] Implement P2548R6 copyable_function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119125
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120277
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120259
--- Comment #1 from Tomasz Kamiński ---
We should use _Arg&& in is_invokable checks here:
```
template
constexpr enable_if_t, _Res>
__invoke_r(_Callable&& __fn, _Args&&... __args)
noexcept(is_nothrow_invocable_r_v<_Res, _Callable,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118775
--- Comment #9 from Marek Polacek ---
On it now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117905
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
As noted at https://github.com/oneapi-src/oneDPL/issues/1955 the standard has
some defects regarding the requirements for these numeric algos. It's necessary
to assume some additional requirements such as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120225
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120225
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |16.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120268
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
phiopt, where CSELIM is done might be the place to put this into. We might
want to try simplifying the COND_EXPR ptr[i] != 0 ? 0 : ptr[i].
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120272
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120276
Bug ID: 120276
Summary: [16 Regression] ICE in partial_subreg_p with SVE
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: aarch64-sve, ice-on-valid-code
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119246
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tomasz Kaminski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9c9a7316adb99693e237164908893a78b86ba000
commit r16-616-g9c9a7316adb99693e237164908893a78b86ba000
Author: Tomasz KamiÅski
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118245
--- Comment #12 from Nathaniel Shead ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #11)
> (In reply to Nathaniel Shead from comment #10)
> > This is fixed for GCC 15. Unfortunately this patch isn't appropriate for
> > backporting as it will caus
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119246
Tomasz Kamiński changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |16.0
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88322
Bug 88322 depends on bug 119246, which changed state.
Bug 119246 Summary: Result basic_format_arg::check_dynamic_spec is incorrect
for extended floating point types
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119246
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111814
--- Comment #11 from Oleg Endo ---
Is there anything that needs to be addressed for this one?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111873
--- Comment #18 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Jambor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9d039eff453f777c58642ff16178c1ce2a4be6ab
commit r16-614-g9d039eff453f777c58642ff16178c1ce2a4be6ab
Author: Martin Jambor
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120276
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jschmitz at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103524
Bug 103524 depends on bug 120125, which changed state.
Bug 120125 Summary: [15/16 Regression] ICE in add_to_same_comdat_group when
using -Os or -fdeclone-ctor-dtor since r15-521-g6ad7ca1bb90573
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120125
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120125
Nathaniel Shead changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|15.0|15.2
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120276
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118775
--- Comment #10 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Marek Polacek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:97121b135530b15bc7d1b9e24daa566d9b0473b0
commit r14-11776-g97121b135530b15bc7d1b9e24daa566d9b0473b0
Author: Marek Polacek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119303
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Marek Polacek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9ce96b683a40a12299c1d0e02727e747c00ad883
commit r14-11777-g9ce96b683a40a12299c1d0e02727e747c00ad883
Author: Marek Polacek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116960
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Marek Polacek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9ce96b683a40a12299c1d0e02727e747c00ad883
commit r14-11777-g9ce96b683a40a12299c1d0e02727e747c00ad883
Author: Marek Polacek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117778
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Marek Polacek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:52202e42919d0d95c13889bed9e69b954e4376af
commit r14-11778-g52202e42919d0d95c13889bed9e69b954e4376af
Author: Marek Polacek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117778
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117501
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004
Bug 55004 depends on bug 117501, which changed state.
Bug 117501 Summary: [14 Regression] Consteval constructor does not initialize
the variable
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117501
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116379
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Marek Polacek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c11cb308c1e2aae427d6f32a1144ae8907dc2649
commit r14-11780-gc11cb308c1e2aae427d6f32a1144ae8907dc2649
Author: Marek Polacek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120266
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
You can use it for all your own code, and and other libraries you rely on, you
just can't build libstdc++.a with LTO. Last I heard, the same is true for
glibc.
But sure, if you think it's not worth using
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110812
--- Comment #10 from Andreas Schwab ---
That doesn't fix anything.
https://build.opensuse.org/project/monitor/home:Andreas_Schwab:riscv:gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112556
--- Comment #11 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Sam James :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:05db28033e4377466bb19f317e67ed91b92fd4a9
commit r14-11782-g05db28033e4377466bb19f317e67ed91b92fd4a9
Author: Joseph Myers
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120206
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
With this patch (and the match part of the patch attached):
```
[apinski@xeond2 gcc]$ git diff
diff --git a/gcc/tree-ssa-forwprop.cc b/gcc/tree-ssa-forwprop.cc
index 3187314390f..741d62135ac 100644
--- a/gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120280
Bug ID: 120280
Summary: ABS < 0 is not optimized to false by match
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120280
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85750
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|anlauf at gmx dot de |anlauf at gcc dot
gnu.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119377
--- Comment #18 from James K. Lowden ---
The logic slated for obliteration is in symbol_declaratives_add() and anything
associated with it. That was the old way -- now weeks and weeks outdated -- to
move declarative descriptors to the library.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120251
James K. Lowden changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jklowden at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120281
Bug ID: 120281
Summary: -Warray-bounds produces an incorrect warning when
compiled with -O3 and --coverage
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
1 - 100 of 132 matches
Mail list logo
