https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99797
--- Comment #9 from Martin Uecker ---
The behavior of GCC is dangerous as the example in comment #1 show. You can not
reason at all about the generated code. It is not just that the uninitialized
value causes some random choice but it creates
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100140
Bug ID: 100140
Summary: Reference gcc development github mirror - Latest
Development Build
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
> Sent: Monday, April 19, 2021 at 1:10 PM
> From: "Frosku"
> To: "Alexandre Oliva" , "Jonathan Wakely via Gcc"
>
> Subject: Re: removing toxic emailers
>
> On Sun Apr 18, 2021 at 9:22 PM BST, Alexandre Oliva via Gcc wrote:
> > That's why it's best to dissent politely, lest they incorrectly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100138
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-04-19
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99859
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pkeir at outlook dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96414
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
On Sun Apr 18, 2021 at 9:22 PM BST, Alexandre Oliva via Gcc wrote:
> That's why it's best to dissent politely, lest they incorrectly conclude
> their opinions are consensual, or majoritary, just because they've
> driven dissenters into silence.
The problem is, Alex, that the trolls mostly haven't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100139
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
>
> > Of computer science graduates I have encountered over the last decade, I
> > know few who started their journey with gcc and they were all in the
> > initial part of the decade. In recent years I don't think I encountered
> > any student who works on gcc; many even start with the assumption
On Sun Apr 18, 2021 at 8:13 PM BST, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
> Utter nonsense, Alex. I think it's clear I don't agree with most of
> your posts on this list in the past month, but it would be silly to
> suggest that you should not be allowed to post here, given your track
> record. Dave
The code presented at the time wrestrict was invoking ranger has a basic
block with about 7200 statements, all of them calculations which fed
into 2614 logical ORs and 1480 logical ANDs.
the GORI component which calculates outgoing ranges starts at the exit
of the block and works it way back
When building libgeos we get an error with:
linux-uclibc/9.3.0/crtbeginS.o: in function `__do_global_dtors_aux':
crtstuff.c:(.text+0x118): relocation truncated to fit: R_OR1K_GOT16 against
symbol `__cxa_finalize' defined in .text section in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100139
Bug ID: 100139
Summary: std::views::{take, drop} don't type erase
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100138
Bug ID: 100138
Summary: ICE with constructor constrained (C++20 Concepts) by
parameter pack length
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
On 16/04/2021 18:30, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
Hi!
On 2021-04-16T17:05:24+0100, Andrew Stubbs wrote:
On 15/04/2021 18:26, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
and optimisation, since shared memory might be faster than
the main memory on a GPU.
Do we potentially have a problem that making more use of
Remove GNU and FSF attribution from HTML page titles.
I don't see why we should have to "comply with the GNU style" if we're
truly an independent project run by the GCC developers and aided by
the steering committee.
OK for wwwdocs?
commit d157082f49725510560cb83f2f1c045e2968ad3b
Author:
Snapshot gcc-11-20210418 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/11-20210418/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 11 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
On Fri, 7 Sep 2018 10:30:30 +0200
Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Sep 2018 at 03:25, Jerry DeLisle wrote:
> >
> > On 09/05/2018 07:57 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > The fortran frontend still uses stack-based handling of (symbol) names
> > > with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100137
--- Comment #1 from Moritz Beutel ---
The problem was discovered in gsl-lite by a user of the library:
https://github.com/gsl-lite/gsl-lite/issues/303
This bug (if confirmed) should probably be added to the -Warray-bounds
meta-bug:
}
return len;
}
int
main()
{
char hello[] = "hello";
span s{ hello, string_length( hello ) };
s.back() = '2';
}
-
`g++ -v` output:
-
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=/opt/compiler-explorer/gcc-snapshot/bin/g++
Target: x86_64-linux-gnu
Configured with: .
On Apr 18, 2021, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
> "Just ignore them" allows the trolls to dominate the discussion
*nod*
That's why it's best to dissent politely, lest they incorrectly conclude
their opinions are consensual, or majoritary, just because they've
driven dissenters into silence.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99255
--- Comment #2 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Replacing
class(t) :: x
by
class(t), allocatable :: x
avoids the ICE. Could be an error recovery issue.
On Apr 18, 2021, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> Dave didn't say who he thinks should or shouldn't be moderated,
Shall we ask him to confirm what I read between the lines?
Shall we ask Nathan?
Shall we ask you?
> it would be silly to suggest that you should not be allowed to post
> here, given
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63797
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63797
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:aff57bcebe534b1d92f78bdfb89a4001a6d12af2
commit r10-9712-gaff57bcebe534b1d92f78bdfb89a4001a6d12af2
Author: Harald Anlauf
On Sun, 18 Apr 2021 at 19:54, Alexandre Oliva via Gcc wrote:
> That you claim some are entitled to share their opinions, because
> they've contributed code (and you agree with them), and that others are
> not because they haven't (and you disagree with them), but you do not
> disqualify those who
On Sun, 18 Apr 2021 at 16:32, David Malcolm wrote:
>
> "Don't feed the trolls" might have worked once, but sometimes they
> start talking to each other, and it becomes difficult for a bystander
> to tell that everyone else is ignoring them, and it keeps threads like
> this one alive.
>
> I reject
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100133
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |INVALID
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan
David,
On Apr 18, 2021, David Malcolm via Gcc wrote:
> I reject the idea that those of us who work on GCC have to put up with
> arbitrary emails from random crazies on the internet without even the
> simple recourse of being able to put individuals on moderation.
All sides in this
> Sent: Monday, April 19, 2021 at 4:58 AM
> From: "Thomas Rodgers"
> To: "Christopher Dimech"
> Cc: "Siddhesh Poyarekar" , "GCC Development"
> , "Ville Voutilainen"
> Subject: Re: A suggestion for going forward from the RMS/FSF debate
>
> On 2021-04-18 00:38, Christopher Dimech via Gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99797
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |middle-end
--- Comment #8 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96013
--- Comment #14 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #13)
> The following variant gives an ICE
>
>type t
>end type
> contains
>function f() result(t)
> character(3) :: c
> c =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100104
康桓瑋 changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100133
康桓瑋 changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100133
--- Comment #2 from 康桓瑋 ---
After actually executing the same code on my local and remote servers, I did
not produce such a result. In both cases, std::copy achieved the expected
high-efficiency performance, so I think this should only be Quick
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 9:25 AM Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> As we have only one P1 left right now, I think it is the right time
> to update abi list files in libstdc++.
>
> Attached are two patches, one is update for x86_64/i?86/s390x/ppc64
> linux (aarch64 seems to be
Hi!
On Sun, Apr 18, 2021 at 05:24:50PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 18, 2021 at 03:03:07PM +, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > If the register named in an existing REG_UNUSED note dies somewhere
> > between where the note used to be and I3, we should just drop it.
> >
> >
On 2021-04-18 00:38, Christopher Dimech via Gcc wrote:
Listen very carefully - In the first quarter of 2011, Keith Chuvala
began discussing the need to drop all proprietary systems used to
command
the ISS. He specifically mentioned products from Microsoft and Red
Hat.
This was communicated
On 2021-04-17 20:10, Christopher Dimech via Gcc wrote:
You have specified that the community does not require my approval or
that
of Eric Raymond. That is true of course. But many have gone through
so
much new age training that they ended up with a very sophisticated way
of bullshitting
-
Christopher Dimech
General Administrator - Naiad Informatics - GNU Project (Geocomputation)
- Geophysical Simulation
- Geological Subsurface Mapping
- Disaster Preparedness and Mitigation
- Natural Resource Exploration and Production
- Free Software Advocacy
> Sent:
On Sun, Apr 18, 2021 at 03:03:07PM +, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> If the register named in an existing REG_UNUSED note dies somewhere
> between where the note used to be and I3, we should just drop it.
>
> 2021-04-21 Segher Boessenkool
>
> PR rtl-optimization/99927
> *
Hi All!
Proposed patch to:
PR100136 - ICE, regression, using flag -fcheck=pointer
Patch tested only on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
Add handling for pointer expressions.
Thank you very much.
Best regards,
José Rui
Fortran: Fix ICE with -fcheck=pointer [PR100136]
gcc/fortran/ChangeLog:
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99927
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #18 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100136
Bug ID: 100136
Summary: ICE, regression, using flag -fcheck=pointer
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
If the register named in an existing REG_UNUSED note dies somewhere
between where the note used to be and I3, we should just drop it.
2021-04-21 Segher Boessenkool
PR rtl-optimization/99927
* combine.c (distribute_notes) [REG_UNUSED]: If the register already
is dead,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99927
--- Comment #17 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Segher Boessenkool :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b412ce8e961052e6becea3bc783a53e1d5feaa0f
commit r11-8237-gb412ce8e961052e6becea3bc783a53e1d5feaa0f
Author: Segher Boessenkool
On Sun, 2021-04-18 at 09:10 -0400, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
Sorry for prolonging this thread-of-doom; I'm loathe to reply to Eric
because I worry that it will encourage him. I wrote a long rebuttal to
his last email to me about his great insights into the minds of women
but didn't send it in the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88175
--- Comment #20 from Jonny Grant ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #19)
> Why is that needed? It says the location is something like:
>
> In member function ‘info& info::operator=(const info&)’,
>
> or:
>
> In copy constructor
On Sun, 18 Apr 2021, 15:01 François Dumont via Libstdc++, <
libstd...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> Hi
>
> Ok to backport this to gcc-10 branch ?
>
Yes please, thanks.
> Tested under Linux x86_64.
>
> François
>
>
> On 13/04/21 10:51 pm, redi at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> >
Some had contacted me about it. Could have sent response off the list.
> Sent: Monday, April 19, 2021 at 1:05 AM
> From: "Richard Kenner"
> To: dim...@gmx.com
> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, siddh...@gotplt.org, ville.voutilai...@gmail.com
> Subject: Re: A suggestion for going forward from the RMS/FSF
But that was around 2017. Perhaps people want to cut costs again - that's
not a new thing. After all, they changed their mind in 2011 only because
they got in excess of 5000 attacks that year. At any time in the past, I
would have decided that science was good for the Sapiens. But now, with
Hi
Ok to backport this to gcc-10 branch ?
Tested under Linux x86_64.
François
On 13/04/21 10:51 pm, redi at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99402
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98534
--- Comment #5 from Paul Thomas ---
This needs to be incorporated into the fix for PR100027. I hope that Jose takes
this PR over :-)
Paul
Hi Martin,
It looks good to me - please push before release.
Thanks
Paul
On Mon, 12 Apr 2021 at 16:59, Martin Liška wrote:
> A column with empty values seems suspicious.
>
> Ready to be installed?
> Thanks,
> Martin
>
> gcc/fortran/ChangeLog:
>
> * intrinsic.texi: The table has
Hi Kenner
On April 18, 2021 12:42:25 PM UTC, ken...@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu wrote:
> > So I think it's quite reasonable to expect that their employers
> could
> > read the SC's secret exchanges (since they technically CAN read them).
>
> I'm a bit lost here. What do you think is the content of "the
Ian Lance Taylor via Gcc :
> This conversation has moved well off-topic for the GCC mailing lists.
>
> Some of the posts here do not follow the GNU Kind Communication
> Guidelines (https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/kind-communication.en.html).
>
> I suggest that people who want to continue this
> It is an argument against the idea that LLVM is the default way that
> people choose.
I don't think that anybody made the argument that LLVM is the "default"
in any sense. What's being given here are reasons why some people
prefer LLVM over GCC.
> In those places, they don't trust Microsoft
> Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2021 at 10:49 PM
> From: "Richard Kenner"
> To: dim...@gmx.com
> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, siddh...@gotplt.org, ville.voutilai...@gmail.com
> Subject: Re: A suggestion for going forward from the RMS/FSF debate
>
> > Depends on the use cases. Not in military surveillance.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99446
--- Comment #13 from Bernd Edlinger ---
Hi Nathan,
I've been playing with a variant of c-c++-common/raw-string-6.c
with your patch:
$ cat raw-string-6.c
$ cat raw-string-6.c
// { dg-do compile }
// { dg-options "-std=gnu99" { target c } }
//
> So I think it's quite reasonable to expect that their employers could
> read the SC's secret exchanges (since they technically CAN read them).
I'm a bit lost here. What do you think is the content of "the SC's
secret exchanges"?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98088
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Hafiz Abid Qadeer
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e4dcb3383bff4c209a918127551cabc56b4171ae
commit r10-9711-ge4dcb3383bff4c209a918127551cabc56b4171ae
Author: Hafiz Abid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96013
--- Comment #13 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
The following variant gives an ICE
type t
end type
contains
function f() result(t)
character(3) :: c
c = 'abc'
end
end
The back trace is
* thread #1, queue =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99255
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-04-18
Hi David, Ian, Nathan and GCC all.
Let's start from what we agree upon:
On April 17, 2021 6:11:57 PM UTC, David Brown
wrote:
> The way you go on about "controversial American companies" and "undue
> influence" suggests you think these companies are forcing their
> employees on the gcc
On Sun, 18 Apr 2021 at 13:49, Richard Kenner wrote:
>
> > Depends on the use cases. Not in military surveillance. And certainly not
> > at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. At Boeing could be the same, but
> > I'm not sure. Before 2011, rather than building things from scratch,
> >
> Depends on the use cases. Not in military surveillance. And certainly not
> at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. At Boeing could be the same, but
> I'm not sure. Before 2011, rather than building things from scratch,
> washington bureaucrats simply picked from among existing
> You will not get funding grants in the US if you mention free software,
> because the US Department of Commerce does not allow it.
This is not correct and I suspect is a misunderstanding of what
"government data rights" means.
> Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2021 at 7:53 PM
> From: "Siddhesh Poyarekar"
> To: "Christopher Dimech"
> Cc: "NightStrike" , "Ville Voutilainen"
> , "GCC Development"
> Subject: Re: A suggestion for going forward from the RMS/FSF debate
>
> On 4/18/21 1:08 PM, Christopher Dimech wrote:
> >> The
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100135
Bug ID: 100135
Summary: ICE when using constants in a mdoule
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
> Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2021 at 9:06 PM
> From: "Jonathan Wakely via Gcc"
> To: "Aaron Gyes"
> Cc: "gcc@gcc.gnu.org"
> Subject: Re: A suggestion for going forward from the RMS/FSF debate
>
> On Sun, 18 Apr 2021, 10:01 Christopher Dimech via Gcc,
> wrote:
>
> > You don't have to believe me
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100134
Bug ID: 100134
Summary: ICE when using a vector in a mdoule
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100132
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-04-18
Ever confirmed|0
On Sun, 18 Apr 2021, 10:01 Christopher Dimech via Gcc,
wrote:
> You don't have to believe me of course. Go ask any lawyer worth her
> salt and she'll tell you the same thing!
>
And if they don't tell you the same thing, they're obviously not a true
Scotsman.
You don't have to believe me of course. Go ask any lawyer worth her
salt and she'll tell you the same thing!
> Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2021 at 7:53 PM
> From: "Aaron Gyes"
> To: "Christopher Dimech"
> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: A suggestion for going forward from the RMS/FSF debate
>
> Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2021 at 7:53 PM
> From: "Siddhesh Poyarekar"
> To: "Christopher Dimech"
> Cc: "NightStrike" , "Ville Voutilainen"
> , "GCC Development"
> Subject: Re: A suggestion for going forward from the RMS/FSF debate
>
> On 4/18/21 1:08 PM, Christopher Dimech wrote:
> >> The
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100133
--- Comment #1 from 康桓瑋 ---
And the libstdc++‘s std::copy is also 8.9 times slower than the equivalent
std::tranfrom:
#include
#include
#include
const std::vector v(100, 42);
static void copy_from_vector(benchmark::State& state)
{
for
Please refer to the *Exemptions* section listed in the link below
https://www.commerce.gov/about/policies/source-code
-
Christopher Dimech
General Administrator - Naiad Informatics - GNU Project (Geocomputation)
- Geophysical Simulation
- Geological Subsurface Mapping
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100133
Bug ID: 100133
Summary: std::copy extremely slow for random access iterator
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
On 4/18/21 1:08 PM, Christopher Dimech wrote:
The cause IMO is accessibility to other projects, most notably compiler
researchers and students who find it a lot easier to target llvm than
gcc because compiler-as-a-library. License may have been a factor for
some of those uses (e.g. I know some
If the purpose was to facilitate lawsuits, and these lawsuits haven’t occurred
after all these years, it seems like it didn’t work. Maybe you are wrong about
the intent?
Aaron
> On Apr 18, 2021, at 12:50 AM, Christopher Dimech wrote:
>
>
> I know that Apple can make some strong ownership
> Correct. The Apache License included certain patent termination and
> counterclaim provisions, made void and null by the LLVM Exceptions.
> Originally, the LLVM License
> was based on the two free software licenses - the X11 license and the
> 3-clause BSD license. By 2005, Apple managed
On 4/18/21 1:15 PM, Gabriel Ravier via Gcc wrote:
I'd like to see a source for that. It certainly seems like complete
bullshit to me, unless you're trying to tell me that they simultaneously
do not fund anything related to free software while also having policy
that mandates at least 20
On 4/18/21 8:44 AM, Christopher Dimech via Gcc wrote:
Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2021 at 6:09 PM
From: "Siddhesh Poyarekar"
To: "NightStrike" , "Ville Voutilainen"
Cc: "GCC Development"
Subject: Re: A suggestion for going forward from the RMS/FSF debate
On 4/17/21 12:11 AM, NightStrike via Gcc
-
Christopher Dimech
General Administrator - Naiad Informatics - GNU Project (Geocomputation)
- Geophysical Simulation
- Geological Subsurface Mapping
- Disaster Preparedness and Mitigation
- Natural Resource Exploration and Production
- Free Software Advocacy
> Sent:
On Mon, 12 Apr 2021, Martin Liška wrote:
> A column with empty values seems suspicious.
>
> Ready to be installed?
Yes, if you've been able to validate this visually (before/after).
Please give the Fortran folks the rest of the weekend/another 24h
to chim in.
> gcc/fortran/ChangeLog:
>
>
> Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2021 at 6:09 PM
> From: "Siddhesh Poyarekar"
> To: "NightStrike" , "Ville Voutilainen"
>
> Cc: "GCC Development"
> Subject: Re: A suggestion for going forward from the RMS/FSF debate
>
> On 4/17/21 12:11 AM, NightStrike via Gcc wrote:
> > I was under the (likely
On 4/17/21 12:11 AM, NightStrike via Gcc wrote:
I was under the (likely incorrect, please enlighten me) impression
that the meteoric rise of LLVM had more to do with the license
allowing corporate contributors to ship derived works in binary form
without sharing proprietary code. Intel, IBM,
87 matches
Mail list logo
