Frédéric Buclin has used the 'sudo' feature to
access
GCC Bugzilla using your account.
Frédéric Buclin provided the following reason for
doing this:
Checking email preferences for the mailing-list. Ignore this message.
If you feel that this action was inappropria
--- Comment #6 from gcc-bugzilla at kayari dot org 2005-11-12 14:12 ---
Created an attachment (id=10227)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10227&action=view)
alternative fix
This is a fixed version of the previous patch that passes tests on
linux-x86_64.
Thi
--- Comment #9 from gcc-bugzilla at kayari dot org 2005-12-06 13:07 ---
I've often found this warning to be a nuisance, because it's correct and
well-defined to omit some braces from the initializer.
There are many cases where the warning is useful, e.g. with aggregates
--- Comment #19 from gcc-bugzilla at kayari dot org 2005-12-10 13:17
---
would the summary be clarified by changing "Non-existing ambiguity when
inhering through virtuals two identical using declarations" to "Ambiguity due
to two using declarations for same member
--- Comment #13 from gcc-bugzilla at kayari dot org 2006-10-15 03:24
---
If this ever gets fixed (which I hope it does) then maybe it should depend on
-std=c++98 so this continues to work by default, or it will break a lot of code
that incorrectly passes extern "C++" functi
Component: preprocessor
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: gcc-bugzilla at seebs dot net
GCC build triplet: N/A
GCC host triplet: N/A
GCC target triplet: N/A
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30808
gnu dot org
ReportedBy: gcc-bugzilla at waba dot be
GCC build triplet: x86_64-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: x86_64-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: x86_64-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33046
ignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: gcc-bugzilla at waba dot be
GCC build triplet: x86_64-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: x86_64-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: x86_64-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33047
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugzilla at vlasiu dot net
Target Milestone: ---
std::regexp constructor fail on AIX (Japanese). Works fine for English,
Spanish, Italian, French and German languages.
$ gcc -v
Using
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94409
--- Comment #2 from gcc-bugzilla at vlasiu dot net ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> N.B. GCC 7 is no longer supported and will not be fixed (but the bug is also
> present in supported releases).
We are going to switch s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94409
--- Comment #4 from gcc-bugzilla at vlasiu dot net ---
That's really bad news for us. Well, we'll wait for a patch and maybe we are
going to backport-it. If it's going to be too complicated we are probably going
to switch to one o
Version: 10.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugzilla at mysko dot org
Target Milestone: ---
The following sample fails to compile with GCC 10.1
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugzilla at ryuar dot in
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 49058
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49058&action=edit
source code.
Hello.
The shift operator doesn't work correctly in som
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96606
--- Comment #1 from RyuaNerin ---
Created attachment 49059
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49059&action=edit
msvc vs gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96606
RyuaNerin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugzilla at daryl dot haresign.com
Target Milestone: ---
The following code throws a std::bad_alloc on macOS (seen via GCC 9.2 installed
with Homebrew, on macOS Catalina 10.15):
#include
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92143
--- Comment #3 from Daryl Haresign ---
$ g++-9 -E -dM test.cc | grep ALIGNED
#define _GLIBCXX_HAVE_ALIGNED_ALLOC 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92143
--- Comment #4 from Daryl Haresign ---
As for conformance, the latest C draft says:
The aligned_alloc function allocates space for an object whose alignment is
specified by alignment, whose size is specified by size, and whose value is
indetermi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92143
--- Comment #8 from Daryl Haresign ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #5)
> C11 6.2.8 says "Valid alignments
> include only those values returned by an _Alignof expression for fundamental
> types, plus an additional implementation-defi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56759
Bug #: 56759
Summary: result of __builtin_constant_p( ) is not constant
enough for __builtin_choose_expr( )
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56759
--- Comment #1 from Cody P Schafer 2013-03-28
00:56:11 UTC ---
This also affects my ubuntu gcc install:
$ gcc constant_not_constant.c -O3 -c
constant_not_constant.c: In function ‘x’:
constant_not_constant.c:4:31: error: first argument to ‘__bu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11701
--- Comment #2 from Eelis 2012-03-22
21:56:17 UTC ---
For what it's worth: as the original reporter, I no longer care about this bug
(or typeof in general), because we now have C++11 with decltype. :)
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugzilla at contacts dot eelis.net
Created attachment 31524
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31524&action=edit
Testcase
The a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59611
--- Comment #1 from Eelis ---
(With -O3)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51665
Bug #: 51665
Summary: undefined reference when passing static const int
member to template method
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status: UNC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51665
--- Comment #1 from Karl Krach 2011-12-23
13:38:22 UTC ---
g++ *.cpp --save-temps
MyClass.o:MyClass.cpp:function MyClass::doSomething(): error: undefined
reference to 'MyClass::M_SOME_CONSTANT'
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107466
Bug ID: 107466
Summary: [12 Regression] invalid -Wnarrowing error
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107466
--- Comment #3 from Mara Sophie Grosch ---
Standard explicitly allows using unsigned short though:
https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/numeric/random/subtract_with_carry_engine
ormal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugzilla at zulan dot net
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 44085
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44085&action=edit
gcc -v (Archlinux)
The follo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85696
gcc-bugzilla at zulan dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #44085|0 |1
is obsolete
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85696
--- Comment #2 from gcc-bugzilla at zulan dot net ---
Created attachment 44087
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44087&action=edit
minimal example
: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugzilla at tobias dot goedderz.info
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 46684
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46684&action=edit
Preprocessed source code
Hi,
I'm experiencing g++ segfaults during compilatio
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugzilla at tobias dot goedderz.info
CC: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Inlining fails with LTO when there is an argument with a destructor. This seems
unintentional to me, given the following behaviour
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91988
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Gödderz
---
Happens with GCC 9.1.0 as well.
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugzilla at daryl dot haresign.com
Target Milestone: ---
If I mark a class with the [[deprecated]] annotation, it complains when the
class uses its own name in the implementation:
class
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84222
--- Comment #1 from Daryl Haresign ---
Additionally, any external use of a static method of a deprecated class should
probably (but does not currently) emit a warning (Clang emits a warning).
class [[deprecated]] C {
public:
void fn() {}
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84222
--- Comment #2 from Daryl Haresign ---
See also bug 79817.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89635
Lucas Werkmeister changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc-bugzilla@lucaswerkmeist
iority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugzilla at minijackson dot 33mail.com
Target Milestone: ---
GCC version and system:
gcc (Gentoo 6.2.0-r1 p1.1) 6.2.0
Compilation options:
-altivec -awt -cilk cxx -debug -doc -fixed-point fortr
++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugzilla at contacts dot eelis.net
Target Milestone: ---
Consider:
template
struct vari
{
static_assert(sizeof...(TT) != 0, "bleh");
};
template struct X {};
void f(void(*)(X));
template v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78966
--- Comment #2 from Eelis ---
The testcase was a minimized version of the (imho innocuous looking):
#include
#include
template
std::ostream & operator<<(std::ostream &, std::variant const &);
int main() { std::cout << std::endl; }
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78966
Eelis changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
onent: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugzilla at daryl dot haresign.com
Target Milestone: ---
Assigning one string to another, where they have non-equal
propagate-on-copy-assignment allocators, does a `_M_destroy()`, followed by an
`assign()`.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79254
--- Comment #6 from Daryl Haresign ---
I guess you don't want _M_copy_assign to be public, either.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79254
--- Comment #7 from Daryl Haresign ---
I would also be inclined to reverse your Guard: have it take 'this', have an
'activate' method which swaps in the new values, have a 'deactivate' method
which releases the memory, and have its destructor swa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33952
--- Comment #5 from Eelis ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #4)
> Eelis: FWIW, gcc has a -fmax-errors=n option; I wonder if setting that to 1
> might be a better fit for geordi? (just thinking aloud here).
It also truncates the error
: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugzilla at contacts dot eelis.net
Target Milestone: ---
Both the reservoir sampling and the selection sampling implementations use a
uniform_int_distribution<_Size> to generate integers distributed ov
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10619
Eelis changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42490
Eelis changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56785
Eelis changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc-bugzilla at contacts dot
eelis
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56785
--- Comment #6 from Eelis ---
Clang's libc++ (which gives the expected result) might be another source of
inspiration.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56785
--- Comment #8 from Eelis ---
With Clang 3.5, given
struct X: std::tuple<> { char c; };
I get sizeof(X)==1. Is that not what you mean?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56785
--- Comment #10 from Eelis ---
I see what you mean! And while stuff with empty types and EBO is IMHO not
nearly as serious as random superfluous bytes that are inserted when you use
tuples of a bread and butter type like char, I agree it would be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56785
--- Comment #12 from Eelis ---
Ooh, very nice! Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65371
--- Comment #2 from Stuart ---
I compiled it for x86_64 and thought it was fine, however, after your comment I
tried compiling it with clang/llvm and can see the difference (I'm not
particularly familiar with the full instruction set)...
I've fo
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugzilla at contacts dot eelis.net
Target Milestone: ---
Consider:
#include
#include
struct X
{
bool alive = true;
~X() { alive = false; }
explicit operator
ponent: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugzilla at contacts dot eelis.net
Created attachment 34365
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34365&action=edit
Testcase
It was noticed that Boost's iterator_facade incurred a p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59354
Eelis changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc-bugzilla at contacts dot
eelis
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugzilla at contacts dot eelis.net
It does:
typedef typename iterator_traits<_InputIterator>::reference _RefType;
const bool __assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57971
Eelis changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc-bugzilla at contacts dot
eelis
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65221
--- Comment #1 from Philipp Ittershagen ---
$ g++ -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=g++
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/4.9/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../src/configure -v --with-pkgversion='Debian 4
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugzilla at enginuities dot com
Target: arm-none-eabi (Cortex-M3)
I've found this behaviour with gcc 4.8.4, 4.9.2, and 5.0.0 (20150308) (all
compiled with the same flags) on Arch Linux (3.18.2-2-ARCH x86_64).
I&#x
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugzilla at bmevers dot de
Having a constexpr constructor on a class with a large array member will result
in excessive memory usage. For example, I wasn't ab
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12086
Eelis changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc-bugzilla at contacts dot
eelis
: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugzilla at bmevers dot de
Created attachment 33994
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33994&action=edit
Preprocessed source
The following code causes an internal compiler error:
template
str
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugzilla at contacts dot eelis.net
Created attachment 34150
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34150&action=edit
testcase
Changing
this-&
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64128
--- Comment #1 from Eelis ---
Hmm, std::allocator::allocate calls ::operator new, which may be user-defined,
so maybe there is no practical way to detect whether it is really using malloc.
:(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64128
--- Comment #4 from Eelis ---
Yeah, I noticed that tcmalloc is also way faster, and since tcmalloc barely
over-allocates for the sizes requested by vector, there is no benefit to using
malloc_usable_size (which it also supports) there.
So I thin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12086
--- Comment #13 from Eelis ---
It's also worth noting that this affects operator== for std::array. :(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65371
--- Comment #4 from Stuart ---
The assembly generated from Comment #1 looks good.
However, the assembly generated from Comment #3 hasn't improved, it still
contains the unnecessary mov instruction on line 2 (mov r2, r3).
The first instruction m
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42176
--- Comment #2 from gcc-bugzilla at gehrels dot info 2010-10-02 16:20:01 UTC ---
I can confirm this bug using gentoo linux:
uname -a
Linux vadmin631 2.6.26-2-xen-amd64 #1 SMP Tue Aug 31 11:17:26 UTC 2010 x86_64
Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q6600
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42176
--- Comment #3 from gcc-bugzilla at gehrels dot info 2010-10-02 16:22:48 UTC ---
Oh, and, btw: The Version i was trying to compile was gcc-4.4.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46332
Summary: __cxa_demangle yields excess parentheses for function
types
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46332
--- Comment #3 from Eelis 2010-11-09
17:26:40 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> I'm pretty sure to have seen this behavior mentioned already...
You may be thinking of bug #36002. That one was about errors emitted during
compilation, and has bee
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46466
Summary: [C++0X] ICE when using constexpr with
-fno-elide-constructors
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59832
gcc-bugzilla at zulan dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc-bugzilla at zulan dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71173
--- Comment #6 from gcc-bugzilla at zulan dot net ---
As far as I can tell it is fixed. Tested with Archlinux "6.1.1" which seems to
be git/1bbd3999).
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugzilla at chwress dot at
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 38942
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38942&action=edit
A small program demonstrating the issue
We (Fabian Ya
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugzilla at lucaswerkmeister dot de
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 39529
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39529&action=edit
Preprocessed version of a small C program that sums
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77436
--- Comment #3 from Lucas Werkmeister
---
Sorry, I wasn’t aware that wrapping is defined but overflow isn’t. The bug also
happens if the summand type is changed to long (or, precisely, int64_t), where
overflow shouldn’t happen (we’re adding at m
initialize members
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: gcc-bugzilla at kayari d
--- Comment #1 from gcc-bugzilla at kayari dot org 2006-12-07 18:03 ---
Values printed out confirm it on Linux for 3.3.5 20050117 (prerelease) (SUSE
Linux), and official FSF 3.4.3, 4.0.1, 4.0.2, 4.1.1
N.B. I meant AIX 5.3, not 5/3
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
--- Comment #4 from gcc-bugzilla at kayari dot org 2006-12-08 10:36 ---
Richard, there's no difference between pod() and p() in this case, both are
value-initialisations of a POD class, therefore all non-static data members
should be value-initialised. I cited 8.5p5 for good r
--- Comment #2 from list+gcc-bugzilla at meyering dot net 2006-06-23 19:58
---
Created an attachment (id=11734)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11734&action=view)
preprocessed input
Here's the same j.i file, as an attachment.
--
http://gcc.gnu.
--- Comment #4 from list+gcc-bugzilla at meyering dot net 2006-06-23 20:26
---
Created an attachment (id=11735)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11735&action=view)
Here's the output of running gcc -I.. -I. -g -O2 ~/j.c -v
Here's the output of runnin
ED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: t-gcc-bugzilla at snowelm dot com
GCC build triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
--- Comment #1 from t-gcc-bugzilla at snowelm dot com 2008-02-06 08:03
---
Created an attachment (id=15103)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15103&action=view)
Testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35099
onent: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: gcc-bugzilla at meta-dynamic dot com
GCC target triplet: i486-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35370
: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugzilla at mkarcher dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
I try to compile the following test program using
gcc -ffunction-sections
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94504
--- Comment #3 from Michael Karcher ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> Huh, looking at the assembly & the object file this seems to be fully a linker
> issue who seems to be responsible for building the GOT. I suggest to move
> t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94504
--- Comment #5 from Michael Karcher ---
I got the command line of gcc wrong. "-pie" just sets the linker flags for PIE
linking, but it does *not* compile source code as PIE. If I use "-fpie",
garbage collection does what it is supposed to do.
As
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: analyzer
Assignee: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: pieter+gcc-bugzilla at plexis dot eu
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 48545
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48545&action=edit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56215
Bug #: 56215
Summary: Cannot create constexpr struct with unnamed unions
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56323
Bug #: 56323
Summary: [C++11] cannot compile inherited constructor for
typedef'ed base class
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56393
Bug #: 56393
Summary: SIGSEGV when -fsanitize=address and dynamic lib with
global objects
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: U
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56393
--- Comment #2 from Takaki Makino
2013-02-19 14:02:13 UTC ---
Thanks Kostya.
Unfortunately -static-libasan didn't help:
$ g++ -g -fsanitize=address -I/usr/local/include hoge2.cpp -o a.out
-lboost_thread-mt-d -lboost_system-mt-d -stati
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56393
--- Comment #4 from Takaki Makino
2013-02-19 15:22:38 UTC ---
Created attachment 29499
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29499
reduced testcase
I tried to made a fairly reduced testcase from boost.
Attached please fin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56393
--- Comment #5 from Takaki Makino
2013-02-19 15:26:41 UTC ---
To reply Kostya's comment,
As shown in the reduced testcase, the program crashes before
ASAN_OPTIONS=verbosity=1 takes effect.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56393
--- Comment #17 from Takaki Makino
2013-02-22 06:38:33 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #15)
> r196201 landed the fresh asan run-time into gcc.
> -static-libasan should work well now, please try.
It works for me, thank you very much for you
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56393
--- Comment #20 from Takaki Makino
2013-02-22 09:01:30 UTC ---
I understand why dynamic libasan is important.
Still it seems for me -static-libasan can be default, except when -shared is
given.
(just because I have no idea how the shared
1 - 100 of 481 matches
Mail list logo
