https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98384
--- Comment #22 from Patrick Palka ---
Thanks for the heads up. Continued execution FAILs on Darwin and AIX even
after the most recent patches is certainly unexpected :( I hope to analyze and
address this soon.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98593
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99365
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99366
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99366
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99365
--- Comment #2 from Patrick Palka ---
*** Bug 99366 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99365
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
--- Comment #3 from Patric
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96443
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67491
Bug 67491 depends on bug 96443, which changed state.
Bug 96443 Summary: Incorrect satisfaction value for dependent placeholder
return type constraint
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96443
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96960
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96444
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67491
Bug 67491 depends on bug 96444, which changed state.
Bug 96444 Summary: Incorrect satisfaction value of placeholder type constraint
on variable with non-dependent initializer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96444
What
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96444
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99287
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99287
--- Comment #6 from Patrick Palka ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
> (In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #3)
> > IIUC, those two types are actually the same, it's just that one of them was
> > obtained through the char_type ali
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96330
--- Comment #2 from Patrick Palka ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> Tried
> --- gcc/cp/pt.c.jj2020-07-27 10:38:19.0 +0200
> +++ gcc/cp/pt.c 2020-07-27 17:25:09.748240198 +0200
> @@ -16838,14 +16838,17 @@ tsubst_c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96330
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99365
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99287
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99445
--- Comment #5 from Patrick Palka ---
Reduced valid testcase:
template struct implicit_conversions;
template
using implicit_conversions_t = typename implicit_conversions::type;
template struct response_type;
template
using type1 = response_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98384
--- Comment #24 from Patrick Palka ---
(In reply to David Edelsohn from comment #23)
> The AIX failure is:
>
> printf_buffer=
> 1.
> 4426950408889633870046509400708600880
> 000
>
> to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97756
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98384
--- Comment #30 from Patrick Palka ---
(In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #25)
> I don't think this is wrong, as long as DECIMAL_DIG <= 37.
Ah, that's good to know, thanks. So that's yet another non-portable assumption
about printf made b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98384
--- Comment #31 from Patrick Palka ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #28)
> (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #27)
> > for Darwin x86
> >
> > * the test at line 83 fails, and with some more debugging stuff inserted and
> > the abort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99433
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99815
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96592
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99833
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99815
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98990
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97103
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96531
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98611
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99833
--- Comment #5 from Patrick Palka ---
It looks like GCC 10.1 accepts this testcase, and 10.2, 10.3 and 11 reject.
The requires-expression is a red herring, we can trigger the ICE without it:
#include
template void f() {
[] (auto x) {
if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99586
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99869
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97962
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95675
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||doko at debian dot org
--- Comment #12 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86859
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94628
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gufideg at gmail dot com
--- Comment #15
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83529
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99874
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99869
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99899
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99901
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.5
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99899
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99859
--- Comment #5 from Patrick Palka ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
> So, on the #c3 testcase, if I put a breakpoint before and after
> fold_nondependent_expr in finish_static_assert and temporarily in between
> those two breakpoint
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99859
--- Comment #7 from Patrick Palka ---
constexpr void foo(int* x) { ++*x; }
constexpr int bar() {
int* x = new int(0);
foo(x);
foo(x);
int y = *x;
delete x;
return y;
}
static_assert(bar() == 2);
We reject the above testcase for seemi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99859
--- Comment #9 from Patrick Palka ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
> The argument is a pointer.
> Now, I bet a pointer to an automatic variable will be seen as non-constant
> and so in that case we might be ok.
> If the argument is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99859
--- Comment #14 from Patrick Palka ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #11)
> For the global vars (so PR80039 too), can the problem be anything but when
> cxx_eval_outermost_constant_expr is called on such an object (or part
> thereof)?
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98384
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11 Regression] new test|new test case
|case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99874
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99433
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97679
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[10/11 Regression] |[10 Regression] [concepts]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99433
--- Comment #6 from Patrick Palka ---
(In reply to gcc-bugs from comment #5)
> Thank you for the fix, but the following code does not compile any more:
>
> ```c++
> #include
> #include
>
> int main()
> {
> std::list list;
>
> constexpr a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99433
--- Comment #8 from Patrick Palka ---
(In reply to gcc-bugs from comment #7)
> Thank you for the quick analysis!
>
> > views::drop(E, F) is specified to be expression-equivalent to the braced
> > init ranges::drop_view{E, F}
>
> Is not co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99968
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99968
--- Comment #7 from Patrick Palka ---
Slightly more reduced:
template struct A {
using type = T;
static const bool value = false;
};
enum E { e0 = __is_enum(E), e1 = A::value };
Compiled with -std=c++11 -g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99864
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99806
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||stream009 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97995
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90215
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97134
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99742
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99008
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
St
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100032
Bug ID: 100032
Summary: renaming alias template that also adds cv-qualifiers
is deemed equivalent to underlying template
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100032
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.5
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99961
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93383
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100054
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99961
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97134
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99846
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99008
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[10/11 Regression] ICE in |[10 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100054
--- Comment #5 from Patrick Palka ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #4)
> Fixed. Apparently 90479 is the wrong PR number for the earlier change, I
> wonder what the correct one was.
Looks like it's PR90749
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99885
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83476
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83476
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99833
--- Comment #10 from Patrick Palka ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #9)
> Created attachment 50591 [details]
> gcc11-pr99833.patch
>
> Untested fix. This seems to work for me...
Ah, I hadn't considered that the problem might be in e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99885
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92060
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99885
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94560
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99180
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pacoarjonilla at yahoo dot es
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94691
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99180
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nathan at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99963
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83476
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8/9/10/11 Regression] |[8/9/10 Regression]
|T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97112
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99008
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100070
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80456
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.8.1
Summary|calling constex
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99387
--- Comment #3 from Patrick Palka ---
Reduced:
template struct A { };
template struct B { };
template class Tmpl, Tmpl V>
void f (A);
int main() {
A{}> x;
f(x);
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100101
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99700
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99683
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99700
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[10/11 Regression] |[10 Regression]
|unini
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98767
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100139
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
1 - 100 of 2642 matches
Mail list logo
