IRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: b7.10110111 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Consider the following code (at Godbolt's: https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/CyqPF9 ):
```
struct
Priority: P3
Component: sanitizer
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: b7.10110111 at gmail dot com
CC: dodji at gcc dot gnu.org, dvyukov at gcc dot gnu.org,
jakub at gcc dot gnu.org, kcc at gcc dot gnu.org
: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: b7.10110111 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Consider the following code:
```
template class A
{
typedef A B;
B x, y;
};
template<>
mal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: b7.10110111 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
The following test program prints results of C++17
std::cyl_bessel_j(100,1000.0001) and corresponding result given by GSL:
#incl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83566
--- Comment #1 from Ruslan ---
> As n decreases, the imprecision gradually gets smaller.
To avoid confusion: this statement is for fixed x>1000.
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: b7.10110111 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Consider the following code:
```
#include
int main()
{
std::array arr={1.32,5,45.3463,4.674,-94.463,34.634};
}
```
GCC 9.1
++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: b7.10110111 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Consider the following test program:
// BEGIN
#include
#include
int main()
{
const char str[]="3.23534634e-320";
try
{
const auto value=std
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86409
--- Comment #1 from Ruslan ---
I was testing this on Kubuntu 14.04 x86_64 with g++ 8.1.0-5ubuntu1~14.04.
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: b7.10110111 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Consider the following C++ code:
//
#include
int main()
{
std::shared_ptr p
mal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: b7.10110111 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 43541
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43541&action=edit
Test progr
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: b7.10110111 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Consider the following C code valid for both x86 and amd64 targets:
#ifdef __SIZEOF_INT128__
typedef __uint128_t Longer
: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: b7.10110111 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Consider the following C code:
#ifdef __SIZEOF_INT128__
typedef __uint128_t Longer;
#else
typedef unsigned long long Longer;
#endif
typedef unsigned long Shorter
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54183
Ruslan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||b7.10110111 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1
: 7.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: b7.10110111 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Starting from GCC 7, code calculating both quotient and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54183
--- Comment #3 from Ruslan ---
Ah, actually your problem is with a constant divisor. I reported it as bug
84759. If you change 10 to e.g. a function parameter, then you'll get
__udivmoddi4.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54183
--- Comment #5 from Ruslan ---
Yes, this is exactly the problem: the generic case is optimized while the
special case, where the divisor is a compile-time constant, isn't.
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: b7.10110111 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
The following example program appears to get different results for different
overloads of std::pow
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70299
--- Comment #1 from Ruslan ---
The machine I tested it was Ubuntu 15.10, uname -a gives
Linux integral3-amd64 4.2.0-22-generic #27-Ubuntu SMP Thu Dec 17 22:57:08 UTC
2015 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
, libc is Ubuntu GLIBC 2.21-0ubuntu4.
normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: b7.10110111 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
The following simple program reproduces the bug:
#include
int main()
{
std::vector<__float128> tests;
tests
ty: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: b7.10110111 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Consider the following C code:
#include
long double __attribute__((noinline)) test() { return 0; }
long doub
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70467
--- Comment #4 from Ruslan ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> ...
> nothing there is able to optimize & -1 (and similarly | or ^ 0, or & 0, or |
> -1).
Just a note: the same happens for arithmetic operations, not just bitwise. E.g
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: b7.10110111 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
The following code demonstrates the bug:
long double inl_scalbn(long double mant, long double exp)
{
long double result
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: b7.10110111 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
See the following code:
#include
int main()
{
unsigned long u = 13;
for(unsigned long i = 0; i < 1UL<
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: b7.10110111 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
The following program
int main()
{
int x=myFunc(3234);
}
gives me the error:
test.cpp:3:22: error: ‘myFunc’ was not declared in
IRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: b7.10110111 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Currently for this code
struct Base
{
virtual int funct(int);
};
struct Der
{
int fun
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77457
--- Comment #1 from Ruslan ---
Same for version "GCC: (Ubuntu 6.1.1-3ubuntu11~14.04.1) 6.1.1 20160511"
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: b7.10110111 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Consider the following simple program:
void f()
{
volatile double x=0.352;
}
I compile it with `gcc test.c -S -masm=intel -fverbose-asm` and get the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77457
--- Comment #5 from Ruslan ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> Note also should be shown in C99 hex floats because that is 100% exactly
> representable of the number in binary :).
Not sure if exactness is worth it. It'll make it ha
RMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: b7.10110111 at gmail dot com
Created attachment 32681
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32681&action=edit
A procedure comp
++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: b7.10110111 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Consider the following code:
#include
#include
int main()
{
volatile long double two=2.L;
long double vol=log10(two);
long double con=log10(2.L);
long double
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66346
Ruslan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
31 matches
Mail list logo
