https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58646
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96645
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105006
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96645
--- Comment #15 from Jason Merrill ---
Created attachment 52663
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52663&action=edit
patch to make dependency on unparsed DMI a hard error
This doesn't seem to break anything in the library, only
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96645
--- Comment #16 from Jason Merrill ---
A more targeted possiblity would be for __is_constructible to error if the
class has unparsed DMI.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96645
--- Comment #20 from Jason Merrill ---
Created attachment 52672
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52672&action=edit
patch to make it an error for __is_constructible
Thus.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92067
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #2)
> We need to be careful about this in SFINAE contexts. It can't be a hard
> error, because it's extremely common for constructors to be constrained with
> std::is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92067
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103769
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92067
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #3)
> Hmm? but the standard says that a precondition for std::is_constructible is
> the type being complete, and we enforce that with a static_assert (since
> PR71579).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92067
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill ---
Created attachment 52674
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52674&action=edit
patch
Like so.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104620
--- Comment #8 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #7)
> IIUC as long as NON_DEPENDENT_EXPR doesn't appear inside a non-dependent
> consteval call then we'll currently correctly accept/reject it ahead of
> time, e.g.:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105006
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105003
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102869
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104620
--- Comment #11 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #10)
> That'd work for finish_call_expr and build_new_method call since they're
> given the original arguments, but other callers e.g. build_new_op never see
> the or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96645
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59950
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10/11 Regression] Bogus |[9/10 Regression] Bogus
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102740
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101767
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103299
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102538
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104719
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96780
--- Comment #17 from Jason Merrill ---
*** Bug 104719 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104847
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103428
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100282
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hewillk at gmail dot com
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102045
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103943
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102654
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102045
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hewillk at gmail dot com
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102123
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103968
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
St
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103291
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102071
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101886
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
This use of 'auto' was not accepted into C++20, so fixing this bug in the
vestigial Concepts TS implementation is a low priority.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102419
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Sum
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102419
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P2 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105003
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103597
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c++ |debug
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104787
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c++ |middle-end
--- Comment #2 from Jason Me
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104107
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10/11 Regression]|[9/10 Regression] parsing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103769
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104847
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102045
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103968
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102123
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103291
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59426
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96645
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.0|13.0
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96645
--- Comment #26 from Jason Merrill ---
Created attachment 52734
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52734&action=edit
patch for tentative early DMI parsing
This patch series (for GCC 13) adds a mode that tries to parse nested cl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101677
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103852
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101894
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101894
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||12.0
Known to fail|12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103852
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|10.4|12.0
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103852
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94404
Bug 94404 depends on bug 103852, which changed state.
Bug 103852 Summary: [10/11/12 Regression] Alias template argument deduction is
available in C++17 mode
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103852
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103329
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103329
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill ---
Created attachment 52753
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52753&action=edit
fix?
I can't reproduce this with the top of either the 11 or 12 branches; if you
can, does this fix it?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103329
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102593
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|ice-on-valid-code |ice-on-invalid-code
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100608
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||92024
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100370
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104578
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12 Regression] accepts |[12 Regression][CWG1315]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104702
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104702
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103871
--- Comment #8 from Jason Merrill ---
Any update?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105187
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105187
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100370
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104503
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103524
Bug 103524 depends on bug 104503, which changed state.
Bug 104503 Summary: [12 regression][modules] bits/shared_ptr_base.h: error:
must ‘#include ’ before using ‘typeid’
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104503
What|Re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101051
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104594
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101717
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91618
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91618
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96604
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Assig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105191
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105191
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98249
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105227
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104142
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
St
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105223
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105223
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104669
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103186
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54367
Bug 54367 depends on bug 103186, which changed state.
Bug 103186 Summary: [11 Regression] ICE with lambda as default argument in
template
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103186
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103057
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104476
--- Comment #9 from Jason Merrill ---
I'm not sure whether it makes more sense to revert the PR92918 patch on the 11
branch or leave it alone; the GCC 12 fix is too complex to backport. I guess I
lean toward leaving it alone, since this hasn't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101677
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104008
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103105
Bug 103105 depends on bug 104008, which changed state.
Bug 104008 Summary: [11 Regression] New g++ folly compile error since
r11-7931-ga2531859bf5bf6cf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104008
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105003
Bug 105003 depends on bug 104008, which changed state.
Bug 104008 Summary: [11 Regression] New g++ folly compile error since
r11-7931-ga2531859bf5bf6cf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104008
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102869
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103943
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101894
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101051
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Target Milestone|10.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105245
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
St
401 - 500 of 1529 matches
Mail list logo