https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101070
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mario.rodriguezb1 at um dot es
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120306
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
Oh I think MSVC is the only one which rejects this for the correct reason.
And I think libc++'s concept define is incorrect too:
take:
```
#include
struct S{
static constexpr auto t = std::copy_construc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120306
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> So clang accepts it also when using libstdc++. when using libc++ clang
> rejects it due to the type trait __is_nothrow_destructible being used with
> an incompl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120312
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103312
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |---
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120304
--- Comment #5 from Joseph S. Myers ---
I agree that it's best not to support legacy __float128 for new architectures;
if there are any remaining issues with libgcobol using long double / _Float128,
those should be fixed instead.
float128-mul-u
r: mario.rodriguezb1 at um dot es
Target Milestone: ---
ICEs on:
```
#include
template
struct std::integral_constant
{
};
```
Stack dump
```
/opt/compiler-explorer/gcc-trunk-20250516/include/c++/16.0.0/type_traits:94:28:
internal compiler error: tree check: expected tree that contains
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119810
James K. Lowden changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-05-16
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120313
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120313
Bug ID: 120313
Summary: nternal compiler error: in move_for_stack_reg, at
reg-stack.cc:1199 since 4.7.1 using -O3
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119753
--- Comment #13 from Bogdan ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #12)
> Suspending while OP's posix submission is processed:
> https://www.austingroupbugs.net/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1925
I forgot to report back here after opening tha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120308
Bug ID: 120308
Summary: 'TYPE_EMPTY_P' vs. code offloading
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ABI, openacc, openmp, wrong-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65909
--- Comment #15 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c07ba5398be194cc390934ae159f7941890bd848
commit r16-682-gc07ba5398be194cc390934ae159f7941890bd848
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120305
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
The difference is int128_t support.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120259
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Tomasz Kamiński from comment #2)
> This seems to be regeressions from PR1579:
PR71579
> r11-2759-g69f571ffc513b689fa26e4c9fceba17c2c989ab3
> r11-3442-gc1fc9f6e10e646f01194c8f150affbc1cfbc404
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120170
Bug 120170 depends on bug 65909, which changed state.
Bug 65909 Summary: check_v3_target_namedlocale blows up on targets that don't
support command-line arguments
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65909
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120310
Bug ID: 120310
Summary: Missing location for initially addressable variable
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120275
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Reduced with only one header:
```
#include
int main()
{
decltype(auto) values = {1, 2, 3, 4};
values.size()
}
```
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120290
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119753
--- Comment #15 from Bogdan ---
People can still comment, it's part of the process. But in a case like this I
would say that it is safe to assume this proposal will stick. It literally just
allows to optionally add flags, which current already i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120275
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 61453
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61453&action=edit
Reduced testcase
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120275
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120320
Bug ID: 120320
Summary: g++ freezes forever
Product: gcc
Version: 15.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: un
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103312
--- Comment #16 from Paul Thomas ---
> Hi Paul, I did not realize that you were working on import.
> Are you aware of
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106035
Hi Steve,
No, I wasn't aware of this PR but should have been. I wa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120319
Bug ID: 120319
Summary: Unexpected number of branch outcomes and line coverage
for C++ programs
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120317
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120301
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120303
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120286
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[OpenMP] Double free|[12/13/14/15/16 regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120259
--- Comment #2 from Tomasz Kamiński ---
This seems to be regeressions from PR1579:
r11-2759-g69f571ffc513b689fa26e4c9fceba17c2c989ab3
r11-3442-gc1fc9f6e10e646f01194c8f150affbc1cfbc404a
I think we went to eager there, and most likely should reve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120304
Bug ID: 120304
Summary: SPARC lacks __float128 support
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120304
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
101 - 132 of 132 matches
Mail list logo
