On Mon, Jul 14, 2025 at 12:52:41PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 7/11/25 5:49 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 02:13:06PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > > On 7/9/25 4:27 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Jul 08, 2025 at 12:15:0
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk?
-- >8 --
This patch implements consteval blocks, as specified by P2996.
They aren't very useful without define_aggregate, but having
a reviewed implementation on trunk would be great.
consteval {} can be anywhere where a member-declarat
On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 02:13:06PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 7/9/25 4:27 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 08, 2025 at 12:15:03PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > > On 7/7/25 4:52 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > > > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86
On Tue, Jul 08, 2025 at 12:15:03PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 7/7/25 4:52 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk?
> >
> > -- >8 --
> > This patch is an attempt to implement P2036R3 along with P2579R0, fixing
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk?
-- >8 --
Found while working on Reflection where we currently reject:
constexpr auto r = ^^::template C::type;
which should work, because "::template C::" should match the
nested-name-specifier template(opt) simple-template-id ::
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk?
-- >8 --
While working on Reflection I noticed that we reject:
union U { int i; };
constexpr auto r = ^^typename ::U;
which is due to PR83469. Andrew P. posted a patch in 2021:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-Decemb
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk?
-- >8 --
This patch is an attempt to implement P2036R3 along with P2579R0, fixing
build breakages caused by P2036R3.
The simplest example is:
auto counter1 = [j=0]() mutable -> decltype(j) {
return j++;
};
which currently do
On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 03:13:25PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 6/25/25 1:28 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > @@ -24604,7 +24604,7 @@ resolve_nondeduced_context (tree orig_expr,
> > tsubst_flags_t complain)
> > }
> > if (good == 1)
> >
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk/branches?
-- >8 --
Here we end up with "error reporting routines re-entered" because
resolve_nondeduced_context isn't passing complain to mark_used.
PR c++/120756
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
* pt.cc (resolve_nondeduced_context):
On Thu, Jun 12, 2025 at 07:13:13PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jun 2025, Marek Polacek wrote:
>
> > +
> > +
> > +Support ++ and -- on complex values
> > + > href="https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n3259.pdf";>
On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 08:36:42PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Jun 2025, Marek Polacek wrote:
>
> > doesn't need any changes, I think. Another is "modified existing functions
> > to preserve the const-ness of the type placed into the function", I don
On Wed, Jun 04, 2025 at 09:18:45PM +0800, yxj-github-437 wrote:
> > This line seems wrongly indented, should be only two spaces more
> > than the if line:
> >
> > if (check_for_bare_parameter_packs (expression))
> >expression = error_mark_node;
> >
> >
> > The patch LGTM otherwise, thanks.
>
On Thu, Jun 12, 2025 at 05:39:26PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jun 2025, Marek Polacek wrote:
>
> > This patch adds the C23 Support in GCC table (compiler features only).
> >
> > While creating it, I've consulted Annex M.2, our own changes.html,
> &g
On Thu, Jun 12, 2025 at 06:59:02PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 12, 2025 at 12:50:00PM -0400, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > +
> > +
> > +More Modern Bit Utilities
> > + > href="https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n3367.htm&q
To be applied on top of the C23 status table patch.
W3 validated. Ok?
-- >8 --
diff --git a/htdocs/projects/c-status.html b/htdocs/projects/c-status.html
index 7e522bc3..5bee3e25 100644
--- a/htdocs/projects/c-status.html
+++ b/htdocs/projects/c-status.html
@@ -31,7 +31,6 @@ GCC has experimenta
This patch adds the C23 Support in GCC table (compiler features only).
While creating it, I've consulted Annex M.2, our own changes.html,
Joseph's "ISO C23 support in the GNU Toolchain" Cauldron presentation,
https://en.cppreference.com/w/c/compiler_support.html,
https://clang.llvm.org/c_status.ht
This patch adds a C11 status table to c-status.html.
I consulted n3220.pdf (M.4) and https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/C11Status,
and checked that Implemented in Version is correct.
I've added links to proposals where it seemed relevant.
Also add a small note about C17.
W3 validated. Ok?
---
htdocs/gcc-
I've checked our C99 status table against the list in Annex M.5 in C23 (n3220).
I found no issues.
This patch renames the title of our C status page in preparation for adding
C11 and C23 lists.
W3 validated. Ok?
---
htdocs/projects/c-status.html | 27 ---
1 file changed
On Thu, Jun 05, 2025 at 08:46:25PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jun 2025, Marek Polacek wrote:
>
> > Also adjust redirects.
>
> I don't see the .htaccess updates here, the existing redirects should be
> updated and a new one for /c99status.html added.
Like
Once we rename and move c99status.html, we also have to
update the links in the manual.
-- >8 --
gcc/ChangeLog:
* doc/invoke.texi: Update a link to c99status.html.
* doc/standards.texi: Likewise.
---
gcc/doc/invoke.texi| 4 ++--
gcc/doc/standards.texi | 4 ++--
2 files change
CC manual to follow.
Ok for wwwdocs?
-- >8 --
>From 62e30c69e991f448be9c10881c8749f0ce98ce70 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Marek Polacek
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2025 15:46:46 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] Rename c99status.html to projects/c-status.html
Also adjust redirects.
---
htdocs/gcc-
On Wed, Jun 04, 2025 at 01:28:39AM +0800, yxj-github-437 wrote:
> Here an unexpanded parameter pack pass into asm_operand which doesn't
> expect to see an operand without type. So use check_for_bare_parameter_packs
> to remedy that.
>
> gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
>
> * parse.cc (cp_parser_asm_operan
On Wed, Apr 16, 2025 at 09:25:00PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Aaron mentioned in the PR that late in C23 N3124 was adopted and
> $@` are now part of basic character set. The paper has been implemented
> in GCC from what I can see, but we should allow for GNU23/2Y $@` in
> raw string de
On Tue, Apr 15, 2025 at 06:46:26PM +, Qing Zhao wrote:
> This is the 2nd version of the patch, the change is to replace "FALSE" with
> "false" per Marek's comments.
>
> C_MAYBE_CONST_EXPR is a C FE operator that will be removed by c_fully_fold.
> In c_fully_fold, it assumes that operands of fu
On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 08:28:55PM +, Qing Zhao wrote:
> C_MAYBE_CONST_EXPR is a C FE operator that will be removed by c_fully_fold.
> In c_fully_fold, it assumes that operands of function calls have already
> been folded. However, when we build call to .ACCESS_WITH_SIZE, all its
> operands are
On Fri, Apr 04, 2025 at 08:56:40PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 04, 2025 at 08:52:10PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > Or do you want something further (like
> > > switch (global_options.x_flag_cf_protection & ~CF_SET)
> > > )?
> >
> > Dunno what that CF_SET is, we’re supposed to r
On Tue, Apr 08, 2025 at 10:19:58AM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> The following testcase ICEs after emitting one pedwarn (about using
> __VA_ARGS__ in a place where it shouldn't be used) and one error.
> The error is emitted by _cpp_save_parameter where it sees the node
> has been used alre
On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 08:27:37PM -0500, Lewis Hyatt wrote:
> Hello-
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118838
>
> This patch addresses the issue mentioned in the PR (another instance of
> _Pragma string location issues). bootstrap + regtest all languages on
> aarch64 looks good. I
On Thu, Mar 27, 2025 at 11:27:04AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 3/25/25 3:37 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk/14?
> >
> > -- >8 --
> > Since r15-8011 cp_build_indirect_ref_1 won't do the *&TARGET
On Wed, Apr 02, 2025 at 06:38:12PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> The following testcase ICEs because c_fully_fold isn't performed on the
> arguments of __sanitizer_ptr_{sub,cmp} builtins and so e.g.
> C_MAYBE_CONST_EXPR can leak into the gimplifier where it ICEs.
>
> Fixed thusly, bootstr
On Fri, Mar 28, 2025 at 10:02:28PM -0400, Patrick Palka wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Mar 2025, Jason Merrill wrote:
>
> > Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, initially with extra checking to make sure that
> > indeed nothing got saved from a namespace level.
> >
> > This isn't a regression, but a 20% speedup for
On Tue, Apr 01, 2025 at 04:31:38PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> The following testcase ICEs (the embed one actually doesn't but
> dereferences random uninitialized pointer far after allocated memory)
> because of a typo. In the RAW_DATA_CST handling of list conversion
> where there are c
On Fri, Mar 28, 2025 at 11:49:48AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 3/27/25 5:00 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 12:00:00PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > > On 3/17/25 6:55 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > > > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86
~90 new DRs. More updates tomorrow.
Pushed.
-- >8 --
commit eabbf82b95871f4cc1561b9d5bd9ba88a849a61f
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Thu Mar 27 19:08:35 2025 -0400
cxx-dr-status: Update from C++ Core Language Issue TOC, Revision 116
diff --git a/htdocs/projects/cxx-dr-status.html
b/htd
On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 12:00:00PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 3/17/25 6:55 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk?
> >
> > -- >8 --
> > We crash while we call warning_at ("inline function used but n
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
-- >8 --
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/template/explicit-args6.C: Remove an extra set of {} in
a dg-message.
---
gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/explicit-args6.C | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/g
On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 05:57:51PM +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Mar 2025 at 17:42, Jason Merrill wrote:
> >
> > On 3/26/25 6:14 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > > My r15-8904-ge200f53a555651 changed the std::vector initializer-list
> > > constructor so that it calls a new _M_range_init
On Thu, Mar 27, 2025 at 12:38:55AM +, Sam James wrote:
> A handful of cosmetic ones in here but most meant the directive wasn't
> doing anything.
This patch breaks g++.dg/template/explicit-args6.C for me.
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>
> * g++.dg/cpp0x/udlit-namespace-ambiguous.C: Fix w
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk/14?
-- >8 --
Since r15-8011 cp_build_indirect_ref_1 won't do the *&TARGET_EXPR ->
TARGET_EXPR folding not to change its value category. That fix is
correct but it made us stop extending the lifetime in this testcase,
causing a wrong-code
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
-- >8 --
Fixed recently by r15-7822.
PR c++/101881
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/ext/vector44.C: New test.
---
gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ext/vector44.C | 5 +
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 05:18:23PM +, Simon Martin wrote:
> We've been miscompiling the following since r0-51314-gd6b4ea8592e338 (I
> did not go compile something that old, and identified this change via
> git blame, so might be wrong)
>
> === cut here ===
> struct Foo { int x; };
> Foo& get (
On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 12:38:31PM +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> In 2001 Subversion r40924 (Git commit
> 52a11cbfcf0cfb32628b6953588b6af4037ac0b6)
> "IA-64 ABI Exception Handling", '__cxa_bad_cast' changed from 'void *' to
> 'void' return type:
>
> --- libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/exception_suppo
On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 04:19:12PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 3/18/25 3:12 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 03:05:57PM -0400, Patrick Palka wrote:
> > > On Tue, 18 Mar 2025, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > >
> > > > Bootstrapped/regtested
On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 03:05:57PM -0400, Patrick Palka wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Mar 2025, Marek Polacek wrote:
>
> > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk/14?
> >
> > -- >8 --
> > This ICE appeared with the removal of NON_DEPENDENT_EXPR. Prev
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk/14?
-- >8 --
This ICE appeared with the removal of NON_DEPENDENT_EXPR. Previously
skip_simple_arithmetic would get NON_DEPENDENT_EXPR> and
since NON_DEPENDENT_EXPR is neither BINARY_CLASS_P nor UNARY_CLASS_P,
there was no problem. But n
On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 10:30:45PM -0400, Patrick Palka wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Mar 2025, Marek Polacek wrote:
>
> > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk/14/13?
> >
> > -- >8 --
> > r12-1094 mentions that adding the assert didn't lead t
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk?
-- >8 --
We crash while we call warning_at ("inline function used but never defined")
since it invokes dump_template_bindings -> tsubst -> ... -> convert_like ->
... -> c_common_truthvalue_conversion -> warning_at ("enum constant in bool
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk/14/13?
-- >8 --
r12-1094 mentions that adding the assert didn't lead to any regressions
in the testsuite, but this test case demonstrates that we can reach it
with valid code.
Here we arrive in use_pack_expansion_extra_args_p with t whic
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 12:28:58AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 3/10/25 6:31 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > build_over_call has:
> >
> > t = build2 (MODIFY_EXPR, void_type_node,
> > build2 (MEM_REF, array_type, arg0, alias_set),
> >
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk/14?
-- >8 --
build_over_call has:
t = build2 (MODIFY_EXPR, void_type_node,
build2 (MEM_REF, array_type, arg0, alias_set),
build2 (MEM_REF, array_type, arg, alias_set));
val
On Fri, Mar 07, 2025 at 05:53:58PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Since Marek's r14-4140 which moved immediate invocation evaluation
> from build_over_call to cp_fold_r, the following testcase is miscompiled.
>
> The a = foo (bar ()); case is actually handled right, that is handled
> in cp
On Fri, Mar 07, 2025 at 12:00:00PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 3/6/25 5:13 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 05:28:49PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > > On 3/5/25 4:00 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 03:31:5
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk/branches?
-- >8 --
The r12-8258 fix assumes that DECL_CONTEXT of 'pack' in
check_for_bare_parameter_packs is going to be an operator()
but as this test shows, it can be empty.
PR c++/119134
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
* pt.cc (ch
On Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 05:28:49PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 3/5/25 4:00 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 03:31:59PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > > On 3/5/25 12:09 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Mar 04, 2025 at 05:34:1
On Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 03:31:59PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 3/5/25 12:09 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 04, 2025 at 05:34:10PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > > On 2/11/25 6:24 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > > > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86
On Tue, Mar 04, 2025 at 05:34:10PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 2/11/25 6:24 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk?
> >
> > -- >8 --
> > Here we ICE since r11-7740 because we no longer say that (long)&
On Tue, Mar 04, 2025 at 04:41:05PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 3/4/25 3:26 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk?
> >
> > -- >8 --
> > This PR complains that we issue a -Wnonnull even in a de
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk?
-- >8 --
This PR complains that we issue a -Wnonnull even in a decltype.
Since we can't use cp_unevaluated_operand in c-common.cc, this
fix targets even -Wformat and -Wrestrict. I think that's fine.
PR c++/115580
gcc/cp/Change
Ping.
On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 06:24:32PM -0500, Marek Polacek wrote:
> Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk?
>
> -- >8 --
> Here we ICE since r11-7740 because we no longer say that (long)&a
> (where a is a global var) is non_constant_p. So VERI
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk/branches?
-- >8 --
We crash because we generate
{[0 ... 1]={.low=0, .high=1}, [1]={.low=0, .high=1}}
which output_constructor_regular_field doesn't want to see. This
happens since r9-1483: process_init_constructor_array can now creat
On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 10:42:07AM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 2/26/25 2:16 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk?
> >
> > -- >8 --
> > Yet another problem that started with r15-6052, compile t
On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 01:15:12PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 2/20/25 9:51 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > Now with the test fixed.
> >
> > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk?
> >
> > -- >8 --
> > In this PR we crash in
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk?
-- >8 --
Yet another problem that started with r15-6052, compile time evaluation of
prvalues.
cp_fold_r/TARGET_EXPR sees:
TARGET_EXPR >>>
so when we call maybe_constant_init, the object we're initializing is D.2701,
and the ini
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk?
-- >8 --
Since C++20 P0846, a name followed by a < can be treated as a template-name
even though name lookup did not find a template-name. That happens
in this test with "i < foo ()":
for (int id = 0; i < foo(); ++id);
and results i
Now with the test fixed.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk?
-- >8 --
In this PR we crash in cxx_eval_constant_expression/GOTO_EXPR on:
gcc_assert (cxx_dialect >= cxx23);
The code obviously doesn't expect to see a goto pre-C++23. But we can
get here with the new prva
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk?
-- >8 --
In this PR we crash in cxx_eval_constant_expression/GOTO_EXPR on:
gcc_assert (cxx_dialect >= cxx23);
The code obviously doesn't expect to see a goto pre-C++23. But we can
get here with the new prvalue optimization. In this
On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 10:14:21AM -0500, Patrick Palka wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Feb 2025, Marek Polacek wrote:
>
> > I suppose it's safer to leave this for GCC 16, but anyway:
> >
> > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
> >
> > -- >8 --
>
I suppose it's safer to leave this for GCC 16, but anyway:
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
-- >8 --
Since r10-7718 the attached tests produce an ICE in verify_address:
error: constant not recomputed when 'ADDR_EXPR' changed
but before that we wrongly rejected the tests with "is
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
-- >8 --
Fixed by r13-4564 but the tests are very different.
PR c++/102455
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/ext/vector43.C: New test.
---
gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ext/vector43.C | 7 +++
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
create mod
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
-- >8 --
We were rejecting this, but the test compiles correctly since r14-6346.
PR c++/96364
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/cpp0x/gen-attrs-88.C: New test.
---
gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/gen-attrs-88.C | 14 ++
1 fi
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
-- >8 --
Fixed by r12-4425 and it seemed worth adding.
PR c++/83144
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-83144.C: New test.
---
gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-83144.C | 21
1 file changed, 21
On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 11:04:09PM +0100, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 2/14/25 4:29 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 09:30:34AM -0500, Patrick Palka wrote:
> > > On Thu, 13 Feb 2025, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > >
> > > > Bootstrapped/regtest
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
-- >8 --
Fixed by r8-6829-gaaec81f10fa314; before that:
Segmentation fault (core dumped)
PR c++/82936
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/cpp0x/vt-82936.C: New test.
---
gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/vt-82936.C | 18 ++
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
-- >8 --
Fixed by r10-3735.
PR c++/82794
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-pr82794.C: New test.
---
gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-pr82794.C | 8
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
create mode 100644
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
-- >8 --
Fixed by r11-735 + r11-2417.
PR c++/70037
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-pr70037.C: New test.
---
gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-pr70037.C | 18 ++
1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)
c
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
-- >8 --
Fixed by r11-175.
PR c++/66878
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/lookup/using71.C: New test.
---
gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lookup/using71.C | 12
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
-- >8 --
Fixed by r10-6464.
PR c++/66519
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/cpp0x/variadic-parm2.C: New test.
---
gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/variadic-parm2.C | 12
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 gc
On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 04:45:01PM +, Simon Martin wrote:
> Hi Marek,
>
> On 14 Feb 2025, at 17:27, Marek Polacek wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 04:20:07PM +, Simon Martin wrote:
> >> The case in this PR does not ICE anymore after the fix for PR118319.
On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 04:20:07PM +, Simon Martin wrote:
> The case in this PR does not ICE anymore after the fix for PR118319.
>
> This patch simply adds the case to the testsuite.
>
> Successfully tested on x86_64-apple-darwin19.6.0.
>
> PR c++/117324
>
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>
On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 09:30:34AM -0500, Patrick Palka wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Feb 2025, Marek Polacek wrote:
>
> > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk?
> >
> > -- >8 --
> > Here we have:
> >
> > template
> > struct
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk?
-- >8 --
Here we have:
template
struct X{
T val;
decltype(auto) value(){
return (val);
}
};
where the return type of value should be 'int &' since '(val)' is an
expression, not a name, and decltype(aut
Ping.
On Thu, Feb 06, 2025 at 11:26:48AM -0500, Marek Polacek wrote:
> Ping.
>
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:05:46AM -0500, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > Ping.
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 03:07:52PM -0500, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > > Ping.
> > >
&
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
-- >8 --
Fixed by r12-3643.
PR c++/101740
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/template/dtor12.C: New test.
---
gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/dtor12.C | 19 +++
1 file changed, 19 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 gcc/
Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk? I'll also update cxx-status.html.
-- >8 --
This proposal was implemented a long time ago by my r9-5271,
but it took me this long to verify that it still works as per P2308.
This patch adds assorted tests, both from clang and from [temp.arg.nontype].
F
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk?
-- >8 --
Here we ICE since r11-7740 because we no longer say that (long)&a
(where a is a global var) is non_constant_p. So VERIFY_CONSTANT
does not return and we crash on tree_to_uhwi. We should check
tree_fits_uhwi_p before calling tr
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk?
-- >8 --
In a member-specification of a class, a noexcept-specifier is
a complete-class context. Thus we delay parsing until the end of
the class via our DEFERRED_PARSE mechanism; see cp_parser_save_noexcept
and cp_parser_late_noexcept_
On Thu, Feb 06, 2025 at 07:32:43PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> As mentioned in the PR, https://eel.is/c++draft/conv.lval#note-1
> says that even volatile reads from std::nullptr_t typed objects actually
> don't read anything and https://eel.is/c++draft/expr.const#10.9
> says that even th
Ping.
On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:05:46AM -0500, Marek Polacek wrote:
> Ping.
>
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 03:07:52PM -0500, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > Ping.
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 20, 2024 at 08:58:05AM -0500, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > > Ping.
> > >
&
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
-- >8 --
The recent r15-7339-g26d3424ca5d9f4 fixed this test too.
PR c++/94100
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/cpp0x/variadic188.C: New test.
---
gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/variadic188.C | 23 +++
1 file chang
W3 validated. Pushed.
commit 3c9e703a45f36113ace827463e6f0240fea334a2
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Tue Feb 4 17:20:18 2025 -0500
Document some further C++ FE changes.
diff --git a/htdocs/gcc-15/changes.html b/htdocs/gcc-15/changes.html
index 14dea6f4..18484915 100644
--- a/htdocs/gcc-15
On Tue, Feb 04, 2025 at 10:39:44AM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> Does this also fix 118304? If so, let's go ahead and apply it to GCC 15.
It does not, with this patch we emit an error, but still crash on
struct A {
*A() = default;
};
Marek
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk?
-- >8 --
In this PR we crash in maybe_delete_defaulted_fn because the switch
doesn't expect a cfk_constructor/_destructor. But we can get there:
struct A {
*A() = default;
};
is invalid due to the void/void* mismatch, so we ge
On Sun, Feb 02, 2025 at 11:14:55AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> As mentioned in the PR, this pedwarni is desirable for the implicit or
> explicit capturing of structured bindings in C++17, but in the case of
> init-captures the initializer is just some expression and that can include
> st
On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 09:34:52AM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 1/30/25 5:24 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk/14?
> >
> > -- >8 --
> > This PR describes a few issues, both ICE and rejects-valid, but
> &g
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk?
-- >8 --
This warning should not warn for
auto f1 () -> auto;
because that cannot be confused with initializing a variable.
PR c++/118718
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
* parser.cc (warn_about_ambiguous_parse): Don't warn when
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk/14?
-- >8 --
This PR describes a few issues, both ICE and rejects-valid, but
ultimately the problem is that we don't properly synthesize the
second auto in:
int
g (auto fp() -> auto)
{
return fp ();
}
since r12-5860, which d
On Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 08:03:37AM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 1/27/25 6:19 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk/14?
> >
> > -- >8 --
> > We've had a wrong-code problem since r14-4140, due to which we
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
-- >8 --
Fixed by r11-2412.
PR c++/57533
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/eh/throw5.C: New test.
---
gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/eh/throw5.C | 23 +++
1 file changed, 23 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite
I would also like to ping this patch.
On Thu, Jan 09, 2025 at 04:15:24PM +0100, Michael Matz wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, 13 Nov 2024, Michael Matz wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > this is essentially
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-May/651025.html
> >
> > from Kewen in fu
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk/14?
-- >8 --
We've had a wrong-code problem since r14-4140, due to which we
forget to initialize a variable.
In consteval39.C, we evaluate
struct QQQ q;
<>>
(const char *) "" ) >;
into
struct QQQ q;
<;
a
1 - 100 of 1275 matches
Mail list logo
