https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109961
Bug ID: 109961
Summary: storage size of 'variable name' isn't known
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109518
Bug ID: 109518
Summary: invalid constexpr code is accepted
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104276
--- Comment #8 from Darrell Wright ---
What about something like a __builtin_overwrite( ptr, size_t ) that tells the
compiler that the range specified will be written. It forms a contract to do
so with the compiler and would allow the memset
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104980
Bug ID: 104980
Summary: Bad error on variable template instantiation failure
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104388
Bug ID: 104388
Summary: Request: A builtin to mark an object as invalid
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104276
--- Comment #3 from Darrell Wright ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> >clang is unable to remove the memset in code like
>
> I think you mean GCC there :).
:) both are true. This optimization would remove the need for things
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104276
Bug ID: 104276
Summary: Fail to eliminate deadstore from vector constructor
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102916
--- Comment #11 from Darrell Wright ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #7)
> C++23 is making these constexpr anyway so I'm not very inclined to change
> this now.
That is good to hear, I thought I had read/heard that there was a lot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102916
--- Comment #6 from Darrell Wright ---
Right, mostly it can fall under as-if(if it wasn't explicitly disallowed) but
because it's observable it can lead to some interesting behaviour differences
when libstdc++ is compiled with gcc and clang.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102916
--- Comment #3 from Darrell Wright ---
Also http://eel.is/c++draft/library#constexpr.functions-1
An issue is that it's high level observable and not just an optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102916
--- Comment #2 from Darrell Wright ---
The constexpr value returned is different depending on the compiler. If one
uses clang and gcc this leads to an ODR issue as
void bar( ) {
if constexpr( foo<[]{ return std::sqrt( 4.0 ); }>( ) ) {
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102916
Bug ID: 102916
Summary: cmath constexpr can lead to ODR violations/incorrect
results
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99535
--- Comment #1 from Darrell Wright ---
I was wrong, http://eel.is/c++draft/expr.const#5.8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99535
Bug ID: 99535
Summary: g++ rejects valid code in constexpr copy ctor and
volatile submember
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99006
Bug ID: 99006
Summary: make_shared silently works
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
15 matches
Mail list logo
