Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
The new uninitialized_{default,value}_construct(_n)? and
uninitialized_move(_n)? implementations are not exception safe: previously
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77616
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from TC
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
GCC accepts
int *p = int();
even though per DR 903, only integer literals with the value zero are null
pointer constants.
This
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67200
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69905
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #4 from TC
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
void f(void () &);
void g(void (*)() &);
void h(void (&)() &);
void i(void (* const &)() &);
None of these
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78163
--- Comment #2 from TC ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1)
> For:
> $ gcc --version
> gcc (SUSE Linux) 6.2.1 20160830 [gcc-6-branch revision 239856]
>
> $ gcc pr78163.c
> pr78163.c:1:16: error: expected ‘;’, ‘,’ or ‘)’ before ‘&’ toke
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70163
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 from TC
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
They are currently
> template
> auto
> count(const _Kt& __x) const
> -> decltype(_
P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
#include
#include
struct nonmovable
{
nonmovable(nonmovable&&) = delete;
};
static_assert(!std::is_move_constructible_v>); //fires
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78302
--- Comment #2 from TC ---
Ugh, quasi-dup, I suppose. But if I'm reading the correspondence correctly, the
ABI breaking is only because of triviality, correct?
So if we just want to make is_move_constructible not lie, it should be possible
to do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78358
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #4 from TC
ormal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
It default constructs the 1+64 temporary lists, which 1) likely does the wrong
thing for stateful allocators and 2) won't
NCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-valid
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Reduced from http://stackoverflow.com/q/40637781/2756719:
templ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66742
--- Comment #9 from TC ---
The ugly fix in Comment #6 should be performant, if, well, ugly.
It may be worth considering holding the nodes via a different type. There's no
real reason why the temporary holders need to be a `list` or have a copy o
: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
If a comparison throws in the middle of the loop,
- list::merge will have spliced some elements over without updating the size of
the lists.
- list::sort will destroy any
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-valid
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Reduced from http://stackoverflow.com/q
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78457
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from TC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60009
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from TC
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
>From http://stackoverflow.com/questions/29013260.
Minimized repro:
struct default_check
{
template static int check(...);
};
struct is_addable : default_ch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65352
--- Comment #3 from TC ---
Depends on how http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-active.html#2443 comes out in
LEWG, it might be a good idea to go with a solution that maintains the
`constexpr`-ness so that it doesn't have to be redone again if the c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62116
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #5 from TC
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Repro:
struct A {};
struct B : private A {};
struct C : public B {
struct A m_a; // error: A is the inaccessible injected-class-name
};
Per [basic.lookup.elab
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Repro:
#include
#include
struct A{};
void operator<<(std::ostream &, A const &){ }
void operator>>(std::istream &, A &am
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65543
--- Comment #1 from TC ---
(In reply to TC from comment #0)
> which breaks if the operator<< called does not return a reference stream. A
> similar issue affects operator>> for rvalue streams.
I meant "a reference to the stream".
++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
>From http://stackoverflow.com/q/29350040/2756719, repro:
#include
int main(int, char **)
{
std::seed_seq seed1{1337, 42};
std::seed_seq seed2(seed1);
std::seed_seq seed3 = seed2;
return 0;
}
Per
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66109
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #3 from TC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54351
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #12 from TC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54351
--- Comment #14 from TC ---
Well, I would have argued that if the specification doesn't say that a function
does X, then it doesn't do X. NullablePointer/CopyAssignable only means that
the assignment operation must be supported.
But then I reali
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56701
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #3 from TC
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Per the resolution of CWG 616, given struct A { double x; };, decltype((A().x))
should be double&&.
Howe
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Repro:
template class Purr { };
template class, class&g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63176
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #3 from TC
rmal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Test case:
#include
struct C {
virtual ~C(){}
void operator&() const = delete;
};
int main() { std::rethrow_if_
erity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Repro:
void swallow(...) {}
template
void foo() {
int t = 0;
swallow(
([&t]{return 0;}(), Is)...
);
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68071
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from TC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68288
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from TC
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Repro:
class Bar{
public:
Bar(int, int, int);
};
int main () {
int x = 1;
Bar bar(int(x), int(x), int{x});
}
gcc HEAD 5.0.0 20150119
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64865
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 from TC
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
GCC 4.9 added generic functions based on the draft Concepts Lite TS N3889.
(They now called abbreviated function templates.) However, the implementation
does not work
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
The allocator-extended constructors of std::stack, std::queue and
std::priority_queue are missing.
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Repro:
#include
int main(){
std::array foo;
foo.begin(); // or end(), etc.
}
Output (http://coliru.stacked-crooked.com/a/e1cbe7e73bcee449
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61892
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #4 from TC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62110
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 from TC
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Minimized repro:
struct foo {
template
operator const T & () { static T t {}; return t;}
};
int main() {
int t(
libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
According to the standard ([map.modifiers]),
template pair insert(P&& x);
is equivalent to return emplace(std::forward(x)), provided that
std::is_constructibl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68869
--- Comment #3 from TC ---
This was http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-defects.html#2005.
I don't think the S example breaks any rule in the pre-LWG2005 version, either.
That version requires that "P shall be convertible to value type", and
st
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Repro:
#include
enum E : char { e };
void f(char) { puts(__PRETTY_FUNCTION__); }
void f(int) { puts(__PRETTY_FUNCTION__); }
int
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58109
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #5 from TC
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Repro adapted from http://stackoverflow.com/q/34334735/2756719:
#include
#include
#include
std::tr1::shared_ptr test() { return
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68995
--- Comment #3 from TC ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #2)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> > I think TR1 is considered as non-supported now.
>
> Pretty much.
The documentation may need updating if that's the case.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67669
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #5 from TC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69016
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #3 from TC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69023
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #3 from TC
: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
basic_string(ForwardIt, ForwardIt) eventually calls _S_copy_chars(), which is
marked _GLIBCXX_NOEXCEPT, so an exception thrown from an iterator operation
inside
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68071
--- Comment #3 from TC ---
This looks like a duplicate of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64095
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Consider:
static int i;
static int* temp = &i;
static constexpr int *&&r = static_cast(temp) + 1;
This correctly doesn't compile,
: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Test case:
#include
#include
struct test : std::deque {
void operator&() const = delete;
};
int main() {
test t;
std::back_insert_iterator b(t);
stdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Test case:
#include
struct foo {
void operator&() const = delete;
};
int main() {
std::promise p;
p.set_value(foo());
}
results in:
In file included from
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
__use_alloc in and __outermost in
take the address of an allocator with &. They should use __addressof instead.
(__outermost doesn'
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
From http://stackoverflow.com/q/34581372/2756719, repro:
struct X
{
~X() {}
};
union U
{
X x;
~U() {}
};
U u;
The default
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Test case (modified from http://stackoverflow.com/q/31229359/2756719):
auto get(int) -> int { ret
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69116
--- Comment #2 from TC ---
I don't think this has anything to do with `end`. Consider the following code:
#include
template struct foo {
T f();
void g(T);
};
template void operator<<(const T&, const foo&) {}
struct x : public std::ost
t: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Repro:
struct A
{
void f(){ A*&& a = &*this; }
};
results in:
prog.cc: In member function 'void A::f()':
prog.cc:3:24: error: binding 'A* const'
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Something like
#include
int main(){
std::vector v;
for(i : v) {}
}
produces a storm of not-very-enlightening errors on trunk:
p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69287
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from TC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69436
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #3 from TC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69436
--- Comment #4 from TC ---
Although this still breaks on trunk GCC on Wandbox:
long x;
auto& f(auto) { return x; }
auto* g(auto) { return &x; }
auto r = f(1);
auto p = g(1);
prog.cc: In instantiation of 'auto& f(auto:1) [with auto:1 = int]':
pr
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
PR64969 fixed cases where an abbreviated function template returns 'auto' or
'decltype(auto)' (or have a traili
: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Repro:
struct A { A(int = 0); A operator+(A) const; };
struct B { B(int = 0); operator int() const; };
template
void f(){
(A() + A() + ... + A(Is)); // compiles
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Reduced from http://stackoverflow.com/q/35002402/2756719, repro:
#include
#include
class A {
public:
A() = default
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69478
--- Comment #1 from TC ---
It seems that the static_assert should check _IsMove and use either
is_copy_assignable<_Tp> or is_move_assignable<_Tp> depending on its value.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66350
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #4 from TC
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
The following code is accepted by GCC 5.1 and 6.0.0 20150615 (experimental),
even though it is plainly invalid:
struct Meow {};
int
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66548
--- Comment #1 from TC ---
See also http://stackoverflow.com/q/30856911/2756719
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Consider:
namespace A {
inline namespace B { template struct C; }
template struct C;
template<> struct C{};
}
Lookup for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66990
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
--- Comment #1 from TC ---
I meant, "(w
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Consider:
struct A {
A() = default;
A(const A&) = delete;
A(A&&) = default;
};
A f() {
A a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66624
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #5 from TC
oduct: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Reduced from http://stackoverflow.com/q/382138
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69208
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56701
--- Comment #7 from TC ---
*** Bug 69208 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=76262
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from TC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=76262
--- Comment #3 from TC ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #2)
> In which case both EDG and Clang get this wrong, as they print "12"
I know that Clang 3.7+ implemented DR1467 without 2137 (in which case "12"
would be the right output)
ormal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
defines __cpp_lib_span if __cplusplus > 201703L and _GLIBCXX_HOSTED,
but only provides a definition of std::s
: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
In :
template
requires (!requires { typename _Iter::iterator_category; }
&& __detail::__cpp17_randacc_iterator<_Iter>)
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
struct A {
int a; int b;
};
A a { .b = 1, .a = 2};
with g++ -std=c++2a -O3 -Wall -Wextra produces
:5:21
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
This is basically bug 64665 but closed back in 2015 - I think incorrectly.
Reduced test case:
#include
struct S { S(int); };
void f(std
MED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
auto&& __inner_range = [this] () -> decltype(auto) {
if constexpr (_S_
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
struct S {
S() = default;
S(const S&) = delete;
};
struct array {
S s[2];
};
struct PS {
constexpr array operator*() const { return {}; }
};
stru
: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-valid
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
template
concept C = true;
template
struct Foo
{
template
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
template
struct _CachedPosition<_Range>
{
private:
iterator_t<_Range> _M_iter{};
public:
constexpr bool
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
#ifdef __clang__
#include
namespace stdx = std::experimental;
#else
#include
namespace stdx = std;
#endif
struct O {
~O() {}
struct
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
template
struct meta {
template
using if_c = T;
};
template<>
struct met
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100631
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #4 from TC
++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
GCC accepts
struct A { virtual ~A() {}; };
struct B : A {} b;
void g ()
{
dynamic_cast(static_cast(b));
}
[expr.dynamic.cast]/2 says that for dynamic_cast(v):
If T is an
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
They are currently implemented as plain function templates, which don't meet
the requirements in http://eel.is/c++draft/range.iter.ops.general#2
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rs2740 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
At least as a QoI matter, the special member functions of common_iterator
should be trivial when the corresponding special
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100825
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #7 from TC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54835
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #21 from TC
101 - 200 of 243 matches
Mail list logo
