Here we ICE with
template struct S {
using U = void() noexcept(B);
};
S s;
since the delayed noexcept parsing patch. The problem is that we create
a DEFERRED_PARSE node for the noexcept-specifier, but we never put the
whole declaration into unparsed_noexcepts (cp_parser_save_default_ar
I just noticed that the effective target is not right,
this needs to be prefer_ldrd_strd instead of arm_ldrd_strd_ok,
otherwise the ldrd is not generated.
Committed the following fix to the test case as obvious:
Index: gcc.target/arm/pr91684.c
=
On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 06:04:54PM -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 5:14 PM Segher Boessenkool
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 04:42:58PM -0700, Nick Desaulniers via gcc-patches
> > wrote:
> > > Just to prove my point about version checks being brittle, it looks
> > >
This has dropped support for riscv64:
diff --git a/libgo/misc/cgo/testcshared/src/libgo2/dup2.go
b/libgo/misc/cgo/testcshared/src/libgo2/dup2.go
deleted file mode 100644
index d343aa54d9a..000
--- a/libgo/misc/cgo/testcshared/src/libgo2/dup2.go
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,13 +0,0 @@
-// Copyright
On Sep 07 2019, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> Hi Ian,
>
>> gotools:
>>
>> 2019-09-06 Ian Lance Taylor
>>
>> * Makefile.am (check-carchive-test): Just run "go test", not "go
>> test carchive_test.go".
>> * Makefile.in: Regenerate.
>>
>> gcc/testsuite:
>>
>> 2019-09-06 Ian Lance Taylor
>>
>> *
Hi!
We ICE on the following testcase, because we don't handle conditional
expression where base has incompatible type (the iv bumped in unsigned type,
but is signed otherwise, as happens for C/C++ signed char/short).
This patch just punts on it, during x86_64-linux and i686-linux
bootstrap/regtest
Hi Ian,
> gotools:
>
> 2019-09-06 Ian Lance Taylor
>
> * Makefile.am (check-carchive-test): Just run "go test", not "go
> test carchive_test.go".
> * Makefile.in: Regenerate.
>
> gcc/testsuite:
>
> 2019-09-06 Ian Lance Taylor
>
> * go.test/test/fixedbugs/bug369.go: Update to match libgo
On 9/7/19 8:27 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Fri, 6 Sep 2019, Martin Liška wrote:
I've been working on transition of cond expressions to match.pd.
With my changes I noticed there's one wrong pattern that leads to:
Transforming _6 > _7 & _6 < _7 into 0
...
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/testsuite
