: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: krzyk240 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Consider the code below:
```
class Base {
public:
Base(int) {}
virtual void
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: krzyk240 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 38150
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38150&action=edit
The *.
: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: krzyk240 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 38313
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38313&acti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70732
--- Comment #2 from Krzysztof Małysa ---
I read some code from unwind-dw2-fde.c and it makes sense.
In the code above, stack unwinding happens in low memory conditions which
causes unsuccessful memory allocations and because of deep recursion, t
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: krzyk240 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
On the following code:
```
template
struct X {};
class Foo {
template
static constexpr inline bool bar = false
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: krzyk240 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Consider the following code:
```
int bar(unsigned short x, int* cache = nullptr) {
if (!cache) {
int cache[1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102577
--- Comment #2 from Krzysztof Małysa ---
Could you explain why this is correct? For example, quoting a relevant part of
the C++ standard will do. As I said, I couldn't find WHY this is the expected
behavior. I need to understand it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102577
Krzysztof Małysa changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVAL
