https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119454
Bug ID: 119454
Summary: gcobol: error: unrecognized command-line option
‘-save-all’
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119456
Bug ID: 119456
Summary: gcobol: huge codegen for use of reference-modification
(and missing optimization)
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119521
--- Comment #8 from Simon Sobisch ---
Hm, sounds like an internal stack check or similar would be good here to
circumvent this issue from another side...
If it doesn't work then it would definitely better for gcc to abort compiling
this code fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119695
Simon Sobisch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||simonsobisch at gnu dot org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119682
--- Comment #1 from Simon Sobisch ---
Created attachment 61038
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61038&action=edit
original program showing the bug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119682
Bug ID: 119682
Summary: reference-modification (temporary literal?) yields
wrong result
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119414
Simon Sobisch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||simonsobisch at gnu dot org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119521
Bug ID: 119521
Summary: gcc-cobol generated programs with memory leak
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119520
Bug ID: 119520
Summary: cobol1: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
(use of field with unknown TYPEDEF)
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119332
Bug ID: 119332
Summary: cobol frontend does not support version dump options
specified in --help
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119295
Simon Sobisch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||simonsobisch at gnu dot org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119329
Bug ID: 119329
Summary: cobol frontend does not support -Walll
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: cobol
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119335
Bug ID: 119335
Summary: cobol frontend ignores -M
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: cobol
Assign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119337
Bug ID: 119337
Summary: cobol: gcobc wrapper should deduce output name
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119336
Bug ID: 119336
Summary: cobol: missing copybooks break parser
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: cobol
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119331
Bug ID: 119331
Summary: cobol: unimplemented exceptions abort compilation -
even if requested to NOT use them
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119694
Simon Sobisch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||simonsobisch at gnu dot org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119777
Simon Sobisch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||simonsobisch at gnu dot org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119771
Bug ID: 119771
Summary: FE (parser): CONSTANT AS LENGTH OF does
not error - but result in length of zero
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119772
Bug ID: 119772
Summary: FE: COBOL2025/2026 (original GnuCOBOL extension)
LENGTH OF usage-specification missing
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119770
Bug ID: 119770
Summary: FLOAT-DECIMAL support + "cannot MOVE '_stack1'"
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119331
--- Comment #1 from Simon Sobisch ---
Side note: there's a working patch for gcobc at
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-April/680218.html which improves
it in general - but this part was explicit left out
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119809
Bug ID: 119809
Summary: FE internal_error internal compiler error: in
digits_from_float128, at cobol/genapi.cc:15293 (bit
data items)
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119364
Simon Sobisch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||simonsobisch at gnu dot org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119790
Bug ID: 119790
Summary: FE (parser): CONSTANT AS figurative-constant broken
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119805
Bug ID: 119805
Summary: COMP-5 / COMP-X issues
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: cobol
Assignee:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119759
--- Comment #3 from Simon Sobisch ---
Note "Copyright (c) 2021-2025 Symas Corporation" is also part of several files,
for example gcc/gcobol/parse.y
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119759
Bug ID: 119759
Summary: LICENSE file in gcc/cobol
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: cobol
Assign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119825
--- Comment #2 from Simon Sobisch ---
looks like the error comes from name resolution and is also reproducible with a
much more simple
Program-id. NofBug.
Data division.
Working-storage section.
01 billTo.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119825
Simon Sobisch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jklowden at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119777
--- Comment #6 from Simon Sobisch ---
Looks good to me (and yes, --include should be possible multiple times), but I
haven't tested this or am a maintainer for gcobol...
Seems -Wall and --verbose (or -v only?) are different beasts, then.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119793
Bug ID: 119793
Summary: FR FE (parser): addition of BASED-STORAGE SECTION
(Fujitsu)
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119632
--- Comment #5 from Simon Sobisch ---
@Bob, what do you think of committing that patch as it waits on one of the
COBOL maintainers (and later or work on supporting that - at least as
"ignored")?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119821
Bug ID: 119821
Summary: FE (parser): CONFIGURATION SECTION rejects valid code
- empty paragraphs
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119810
Bug ID: 119810
Summary: FE: -include does not unset "included from"
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: cobo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119768
Bug ID: 119768
Summary: FE: parsing PIC N and NAT is broken
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: cobol
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119769
Bug ID: 119769
Summary: FE: GnuCOBOL extension BINARY-C-LONG missing
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: cob
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119883
Bug ID: 119883
Summary: codegen: recursive user-defined functions don't run
recursive
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119886
Bug ID: 119886
Summary: runtime-switches are not documented / implemented (and
don
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119885
Bug ID: 119885
Summary: libgcobol: SQRT wrong argument check
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: cobol
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119887
Bug ID: 119887
Summary: runtime-switches are not documented / implemented (and
don't pass NC211A and others)
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119521
--- Comment #3 from Simon Sobisch ---
Note: some people will argue that the program should only abort, because/when
exception checking is on.
At least if it is, libgcobol needs to save the location, statement, file and
exception that happened (f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119521
--- Comment #4 from Simon Sobisch ---
Am 28. März 2025 15:40:49 GMT-12:00 schrieb "rdubner at gcc dot gnu.org"
:
>https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119521
>
>--- Comment #2 from Robert Dubner ---
>Additional: The leaking memory is b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113168
Simon Sobisch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||simonsobisch at gnu dot org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119455
Bug ID: 119455
Summary: gcobol: needs optimization for direct assignments
(don't call into runtime)
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119457
Bug ID: 119457
Summary: gcobol: big codegen for simple STRING plus malloc/free
(and missing optimization)
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119632
Bug ID: 119632
Summary: section segments (cobol85) not implemented, "ignored"
-> raising compile error
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119637
Bug ID: 119637
Summary: link error for LINAGE-COUNTER
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: cobol
As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119521
--- Comment #6 from Simon Sobisch ---
I wanted to originally say that's fixed (the memory leak in EXEC85 is), but
running NIST DB105A still produces the same issue.
heaptrack shows 34,4GB leaked, most allocations (256+63) come from allocate in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119633
Bug ID: 119633
Summary: compile error for debug-module USE FOR DEBUGGING
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119638
Bug ID: 119638
Summary: WRITE FROM x BEFORE Y raises compile error (SQ207M)
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119254
Simon Sobisch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||simonsobisch at gnu dot org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119639
Bug ID: 119639
Summary: runtime switches in SPECIAL NAMES not recognised
(parser issue)
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119634
Bug ID: 119634
Summary: compile error: sorry, unimplemented: Global
declarative _DECLARATIVES_EVAL1
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119636
Bug ID: 119636
Summary: compile error: gcobol1 does not find file descriptions
in case of obsolete FD phrases
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119769
Simon Sobisch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119335
--- Comment #2 from Simon Sobisch ---
That's totally fine if those are _really_ the files read-in as copybooks (if
they were opened with an extension, then of course this should be in).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119632
--- Comment #7 from Simon Sobisch ---
I think
https://gitlab.cobolworx.com/COBOLworx/gcc-cobol/-/commit/9c2fcd3606662e550aea6173b06bc2a500b2ac52
is the right approach (adding a warning later, syntax-check if not iso,
otherwise abort).
But it sh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119809
--- Comment #4 from Simon Sobisch ---
Looking forward to have a compiler targetting ISO COBOL to support that one day
:-)
Note: in C this would be a struct with int : 1, included, I think.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119810
--- Comment #3 from Simon Sobisch ---
Current GCC only raises that error if there is no NL after the final (which
seems an interesting bug as well), so you won't see that error with the code
example.
Just use DATA DIVI. (= a syntax error), may
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119632
--- Comment #9 from Simon Sobisch ---
Note: GnuCOBOL also support that, just in case a paying customer comes around
:-)
To not break NIST85 gcobol should set -std=cobol85 to -dialect ibm, with the
current implementation.
(Note: "stacking" -dia
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119634
--- Comment #1 from Simon Sobisch ---
rechecked with today's debian package (now gcc 16), the result is identical,
also with -dialect ibm
Note: current versions still document the USE statement for procedures
https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/cobol-z
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119638
--- Comment #2 from Simon Sobisch ---
Ooops - current debian package results in
gcobol tests/cobol85/SQ/SQ207M.CBL
(null):0: confused by earlier errors, bailing out
That seems like a sever bug (@jklowden: feel free to create a new one for th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119883
Simon Sobisch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119821
Simon Sobisch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119805
--- Comment #1 from Simon Sobisch ---
still failing with today's package
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119768
--- Comment #1 from Simon Sobisch ---
still happens; note: for improved error handling the "guessed
Alphanumeric-edited" could be used to internally define nat, for example as
plain PIC X, that would prevent the second error
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119520
Simon Sobisch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|WORKSFORME |FIXED
--- Comment #2 from Simon Sobisch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120401
Bug ID: 120401
Summary: gcobol allows arithmetic on alphanumeric fields
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119805
--- Comment #2 from Simon Sobisch ---
... no, only fails without dialect; with gnu/ibm now compiles
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120402
Bug ID: 120402
Summary: gcobol does not check precedence of PIC characters
Product: gcc
Version: 13.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119638
--- Comment #1 from Simon Sobisch ---
ping @jklowden
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119256
Simon Sobisch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||simonsobisch at gnu dot org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119332
--- Comment #3 from Simon Sobisch ---
Instead of "/dev/null" you can also write "banana", it doesn't matter. Seems
like the option parsing is broken "somewhere".
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120417
Bug ID: 120417
Summary: gcc -m32 -O1 codegen error, leading to SIGSEGV,
workaround -fno-tree-coalesce-vars
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119454
--- Comment #3 from Simon Sobisch ---
The "how to create a bug report" is identical for all GCC frontends (so far).
It is documented at https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/#detailed
> In general, all the information we need can be obtained by collecting t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120402
--- Comment #2 from Simon Sobisch ---
Yes, U as per currently IBM (the COBOL Development group is in the process of
adding it for the next standard).
To handle the precedence - feel free to copy GnuCOBOL's implementation in
cobc/tree.c, especia
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119633
--- Comment #2 from Simon Sobisch ---
Nearly agreed. As long as there is no "WITH DEBUGGING" active (which you can
warn or even error on) an indicator D is, just as a * or a / an indicator
defining that the line has no executable code.
It can a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119457
--- Comment #2 from Simon Sobisch ---
I tend to disagree as the referenced one is explicit about MOVE (and of course
using matching type assignments and functions, possibly split like for strings
using memcpy+memset for space is most reasonable
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120417
--- Comment #2 from Simon Sobisch ---
I'll provide the result of --save-temps later, so you see both the .i and .s
files.
Note that to link and run the code you'd have to have a matching GnuCOBOL
installation (linked tarball has 5MB and only li
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119636
--- Comment #4 from Simon Sobisch ---
Please reopen as this is not about doing anything with the obsolete code in any
way, but ignoring = "parse in the water".
The main issue is that the FD is not recognized any more, and yes, there are a
lot o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120417
--- Comment #4 from Simon Sobisch ---
@sjames: What do you mean with "needs reduction"? And do you intend to do it on
your own?
[Note: I've reduced the original program that was generated from as much as
possible, then also reduced the amount o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120417
--- Comment #3 from Simon Sobisch ---
Created attachment 61511
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=61511&action=edit
save-temps: preprocessed and assembly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120417
--- Comment #7 from Simon Sobisch ---
UB may be necessary to trigger that (and with GCC+libc that _does_ work on all
environments but GNU/Linux 32bit [in theory it could also be multiarch -m32,
but I think that should not make a difference]) :-/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120417
--- Comment #9 from Simon Sobisch ---
Checked -fstack-reuse=none - same abort.
The main issue here is the language this C code has to cover: COBOL allows for
any trailing arguments to be "left out".
If the COBOL compiler knows about the paramet
85 matches
Mail list logo
