https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105418
Jiu Fu Guo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105418
--- Comment #6 from Jiu Fu Guo ---
(In reply to Jiu Fu Guo from comment #5)
...
> This issue happens when calling debug_tree/decl_as_string manually inside
> FE. At where overloaded functions (::new) are not resolved yet, and then
> cause
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105418
--- Comment #5 from Jiu Fu Guo ---
0x1089f887 dump_substitution
/home/guojiufu/gcc/gcc-mainline-base/gcc/cp/error.cc:1654
0x108a1c2f dump_function_decl
/home/guojiufu/gcc/gcc-mainline-base/gcc/cp/error.cc:1817
0x1089e187
el: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 13.0.0 20220428 (experimental) (GCC)
Pushed as obvious.
Martin
gcc/ada/ChangeLog:
* gnatvsn.ads: Bump Library_Version to 13.
---
gcc/ada/gnatvsn.ads | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/gcc/ada/gnatvsn.ads b/gcc/ada/gnatvsn.ads
index 47a06b96c3c..311a103b2a8 100644
--- a/gcc/ada/gnatvsn.ads
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105428
--- Comment #2 from Zdenek Sojka ---
(In reply to jos...@codesourcery.com from comment #1)
> What MPC version are you using?
Thank you for the reply. If I understand the backtrace correctly I am using the
libraries downloaded by the
My r161129 changed check_trait_type to reject arrays of unknown bound of
incomplete type, but I can't find a rationale for that, and now think it's
wrong: the standard just requires that the type be "complete, cv void, or an
array of unknown bound." I imagine that allowing arrays of unknown bound
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102651
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:97b30a399ef561f6f37a2c08c830fdf3141bb504
commit r13-24-g97b30a399ef561f6f37a2c08c830fdf3141bb504
Author: Jason Merrill
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49387
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:97b30a399ef561f6f37a2c08c830fdf3141bb504
commit r13-24-g97b30a399ef561f6f37a2c08c830fdf3141bb504
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Fri
PR49387 was a problem with initially asking for a typeid for a class
template specialization before it was complete, and later actually filling
in the descriptor when the class was complete, and thus disagreeing on the
form of the descriptor. I fixed that by forcing the class to be complete,
but
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25689
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:654f6978cdc85a3970ff2c478d4df3e55cf4d3ab
commit r13-23-g654f6978cdc85a3970ff2c478d4df3e55cf4d3ab
Author: Zhao Wei Liew
Date: Tue
On Apr 28, 2022, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 03:09:54AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> +# ifdef __VSX__
> No space after # (here and everywhere else).
'k, thanks
>> + "no __intrinsic_type support for [long] double on PPC w/o
>> VSX");
> This change
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105430
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I Assume here this is using a GNU extension of allowing the const struct copy
in a constant expression.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105430
Bug ID: 105430
Summary: [11/12/13 Regression] [DR 413] Change in value for
"Partial overriding of constant struct/union
initializers with designated initializers"
Product:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004
Bug 55004 depends on bug 91278, which changed state.
Bug 91278 Summary: equal comparison of local arrays (with offset) inside
constexpr is rejected
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91278
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91278
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90347
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105325
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
On Thu, 28 Apr 2022 15:11:49 PDT (-0700), philipp.toms...@vrull.eu wrote:
Kito,
Did you have a chance to take a look at this one?
I assume this will have to wait until we reopen for 13...
OK for 13? Also: OK for a backport (once a branch for that exists)?
I'd assumed it was 13 material when
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86515
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84930
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87656
--- Comment #14 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #11)
> -Wold-style-definition
>
> KnR style function definitions have been deprecated for about 35 years.
>
> Yes, there is a warning for it in gcc, but that
Snapshot gcc-10-20220428 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/10-20220428/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 10 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105427
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Maybe it needs a dg-skip-if for the has_arch_XXX, instead of in the dg-do
target clause?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71424
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
On Thu, 28 Apr 2022 15:22:37 PDT (-0700), jos...@codesourcery.com wrote:
On Thu, 28 Apr 2022, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
On Thu, 28 Apr 2022 15:12:39 PDT (-0700), jos...@codesourcery.com wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Apr 2022, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
>
> > +proc check_effective_target_fenv_setround {} {
> > +
On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 11:22:45PM +0100, Iain Sandoe wrote:
> how about the following, which uniques the names by bind scope, scope nest
> and then
> sequence within that?
That LGTM.
> --- a/gcc/cp/coroutines.cc
> +++ b/gcc/cp/coroutines.cc
> @@ -3913,6 +3913,7 @@ register_local_var_uses (tree
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105427
--- Comment #1 from Segher Boessenkool ---
mtvsrdd requires ISA 3.0 though (i.e. power9).
> On 28 Apr 2022, at 20:26, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 08:17:04PM +0100, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Iain Sandoe
>>
>> PR c++/105426
>>
>> gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
>>
>> * coroutines.cc (register_local_var_uses): Allow promotion of unnamed
>>
On Thu, 28 Apr 2022, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Apr 2022 15:12:39 PDT (-0700), jos...@codesourcery.com wrote:
> > On Thu, 28 Apr 2022, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> >
> > > +proc check_effective_target_fenv_setround {} {
> > > + return [check_runtime fenv_setround {
> > > +#include
> > >
On Thu, 28 Apr 2022 15:12:39 PDT (-0700), jos...@codesourcery.com wrote:
On Thu, 28 Apr 2022, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
+proc check_effective_target_fenv_setround {} {
+ return [check_runtime fenv_setround {
+#include
+#include
+int
+main (void)
+{
+ if (fesetround (1)
On Thu, 28 Apr 2022, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> +proc check_effective_target_fenv_setround {} {
> + return [check_runtime fenv_setround {
> +#include
> +#include
> +int
> +main (void)
> +{
> + if (fesetround (1) == 0)
There is no reason to expect that 1 is a valid
Kito,
Did you have a chance to take a look at this one?
I assume this will have to wait until we reopen for 13...
OK for 13? Also: OK for a backport (once a branch for that exists)?
Philipp.
On Sun, 24 Apr 2022 at 01:44, Philipp Tomsich wrote:
>
> The Zbb support has introduced ctz and clz
On Thu, 28 Apr 2022, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote:
> We are eventually ICEing in decimal_to_decnumber on non-decimal
> REAL_VALUE_TYPE that creep in from uses of build_real (..., dconst*)
> for DFP types. The following extends the decimal_to_decnumber
> special-casing of dconst* to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105428
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
What MPC version are you using? There have been a few fixes for slowness
in the MPC inverse trigonometric and hyperbolic functions over the years,
though there may still be scope for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105366
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105365
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by David Malcolm
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7f6033735bf5174f19ef0ab8efd92b075bcb277d
commit r11-9950-g7f6033735bf5174f19ef0ab8efd92b075bcb277d
Author: David Malcolm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105366
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by David Malcolm
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7f6033735bf5174f19ef0ab8efd92b075bcb277d
commit r11-9950-g7f6033735bf5174f19ef0ab8efd92b075bcb277d
Author: David Malcolm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105252
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by David Malcolm
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:03e7ac9021361cfee6cb55ca08638bbb0dab12a9
commit r11-9949-g03e7ac9021361cfee6cb55ca08638bbb0dab12a9
Author: David Malcolm
The following patch updates the Solaris baselines for GCC 12.1.
Tested on i386-pc-solaris2.11 and sparc-sun-solaris2.11 (Solaris 11.3
and 11.4 in each case).
The only (expected) difference between the 11.3 and 11.4 versions is
--- baseline_symbols.txt.s113s 2022-04-28 10:37:11.464068450 +
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105424
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED
Ever confirmed|1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105424
--- Comment #3 from Liam White ---
Compile with c++ -std=gnu++20 -O1 -Werror=stringop-overread to reproduce.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105424
Liam White changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #52897|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105424
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Ever confirmed|0
A restored build has been detected on builder gccrust-debian-ppc64 while
building gccrust.
Full details are available at:
https://builder.sourceware.org/buildbot/#builders/3/builds/63
Build state: build successful
Revision: ae085ac7b12809cadaf6bfdb18c34f1a177290c1
Worker: debian-ppc64
Build
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67048
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105429
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105429
Bug ID: 105429
Summary: Unnecessary moves generated by the compiler.
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
A new failure has been detected on builder gccrust-debian-ppc64 while building
gccrust.
Full details are available at:
https://builder.sourceware.org/buildbot/#builders/3/builds/62
Build state: failed 'grep unexpected ...' (failure)
Revision: 7fe6bc1ba1a8d296262e1e06ac067190c8ab3ebb
Worker:
bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-as --disable-libstdcxx-pch
--prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-r13-7-20220428134959-g00c4405cd7f-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-nobootstrap-amd64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 13.0.0 20220428 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103236
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 08:17:04PM +0100, Iain Sandoe wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Iain Sandoe
>
> PR c++/105426
>
> gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
>
> * coroutines.cc (register_local_var_uses): Allow promotion of unnamed
> temporaries to coroutine frame copies.
> ---
> gcc/cp/coroutines.cc |
Ping #4:
| Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2022 21:14:55 -0400
| From: Michael Meissner
| Subject: [PATCH, V4] Eliminate power8 fusion options, use power8 tuning, PR
target/102059
| Message-ID:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-April/593153.html
--
Michael Meissner, IBM
PO Box 98, Ayer,
The changes to fix PR 105287 included a tightening of the constraints on which
variables are promoted to frame copies. This has exposed that we are failing
to name some variables that should be promoted.
The long-term fix is to address the cases where the naming has been missed,
but for the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103938
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Alex Coplan from comment #7)
> A bisect shows this started with
> r12-2288-g8695bf78dad1a42636775843ca832a2f4dba4da3 :
>
> commit 8695bf78dad1a42636775843ca832a2f4dba4da3
> Author: Jonathan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105373
--- Comment #12 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Avi Kivity from comment #8)
> Hoping this is a duplicate of PR105287. Checking.
I doubt it, it would seem more likely that the temporary value representing the
non-coroutine lambda object is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105426
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |iains at gcc dot gnu.org
Last
> Given that 12 has been branched off, is it OK now to commit this patch?
How does the patch affect the results of “make check-gfortran”? How many tests
that failed or were unsupported pass?
FX
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105425
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
On 4/28/2022 10:30 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
[Jeff, this is the same patch I sent you last week with minor tweaks
to the commit message.]
And I just dropped it into the tester. We should have the vast majority
of targets tested by this time tomorrow.
[Despite the verbosity of the
---
IMO this one is worth documenting too, not sure if it's too late for
gcc-12's docs (due to those branch commits) so I haven't committed it
yet to avoid any fallout.
---
htdocs/gcc-12/changes.html | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/htdocs/gcc-12/changes.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105425
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:38bdf2dccf6a239598ef808ed11a904e5f2a186e
commit r12-8317-g38bdf2dccf6a239598ef808ed11a904e5f2a186e
Author: Patrick Palka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105285
--- Comment #11 from David Malcolm ---
Should be fixed on trunk for GCC 13 by the above commit.
I hope to backport this to GCC 12; keeping this open until that's done.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105388
Gaius Mulley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
PR analyzer/105285 reports a false positive from
-Wanalyzer-null-dereference on git.git's reftable/reader.c.
A reduced version of the problem can be seen in test_1a of
gcc.dg/analyzer/symbolic-12.c in the following:
void test_1a (void *p, unsigned next_off)
{
struct st_1 *r = p;
I found this extension to -fdump-analyzer-feasibility very helpful when
debugging PR analyzer/105285.
Successfully bootstrapped & regrtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
Pushed to trunk as r13-6-gd8586b00dd00a1783862da5f0c8811a740400074.
gcc/analyzer/ChangeLog:
* diagnostic-manager.cc
On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 9:59 AM Jeff Law wrote:
>
>
>
> On 4/28/2022 10:27 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 9:10 AM Jeff Law via Gcc-patches
> > wrote:
> >> As I mentioned in the original thread, my change to pr94157_0 was an
> >> attempt to avoid these warnings by passing a magic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105285
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:00c4405cd7f6a144d0a439e4d848d246920e6ff3
commit r13-7-g00c4405cd7f6a144d0a439e4d848d246920e6ff3
Author: David Malcolm
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87656
--- Comment #13 from Andreas Schwab ---
Like bash.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105285
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d8586b00dd00a1783862da5f0c8811a740400074
commit r13-6-gd8586b00dd00a1783862da5f0c8811a740400074
Author: David Malcolm
Date: Thu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63164
--- Comment #6 from Avi Kivity ---
I already owe you many beers, but this one is special.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63164
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Avi, in the BZ Preferences you can set "After changing a bug" to "Show the
updated bug" instead of jumping to the next one in the list.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103938
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jonathan.wright at arm dot com
---
Ping.
On Wed, 2022-04-06 at 23:26 +0800, Xi Ruoyao via Gcc-patches wrote:
> Document ABI changes in r12-7961, 7962, and 8023. Ok for wwwdocs?
>
> ---
> htdocs/gcc-12/changes.html | 25 -
> 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git
On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 12:53:06PM -0400, Patrick Palka wrote:
> Here ever since r12-6022-gbb2a7f80a98de3 we stopped deeming the partial
> specialization #2 to be more specialized than #1 ultimately because
> dependent operator expressions now have a DEPENDENT_OPERATOR_TYPE type
> instead of an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105373
--- Comment #11 from Avi Kivity ---
Created attachment 52899
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52899=edit
simple(r) reproducer
I was able to reduce it to something simple (102 lines), but I was only able to
verify that wrong
Hi Thomas,
On 27 April 2022 22:34:39 CEST, Thomas Koenig via Fortran
wrote:
+@item @code{'big_endian'} Do all unformatted I/O in big_endian mod.e
ISTM that this should be s/mod.e/mode./ ?
thanks,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105425
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:509fd16da8528444dccc98cef57a18a295c3f1b4
commit r13-5-g509fd16da8528444dccc98cef57a18a295c3f1b4
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: Thu
Given that 12 has been branched off, is it OK now to commit this patch?
On 22-04-14 16:09:35, Piotr Kubaj wrote:
> On 22-04-14 09:05:17, FX wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > > can you check the following patch?
> >
> > Why restrict it to powerpc-freebsd only, and not all freebsd? Do they
> > differ?
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99290
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105427
Bug ID: 105427
Summary: [12 regression]
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: testsuite
Assignee:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99290
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9821d286bce3edf1d36168f129bfc7fe99c15fc3
commit r11-9948-g9821d286bce3edf1d36168f129bfc7fe99c15fc3
Author: Jonathan
On Thu, 28 Apr 2022 at 17:45, Koning, Paul via Libstdc++
wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Apr 28, 2022, at 8:37 AM, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc-patches
> > wrote:
> >
> > I intend to commit this patch soon. This isn't changing the policy, just
> > adjusting the docs to match the current policy.
> >
> > I'm open
On 4/28/2022 10:27 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 9:10 AM Jeff Law via Gcc-patches
wrote:
As I mentioned in the original thread, my change to pr94157_0 was an
attempt to avoid these warnings by passing a magic flag to the linker.
Of course we may not be using GNU ld. Or we may
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87656
--- Comment #12 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #11)
> -Wold-style-definition
>
> KnR style function definitions have been deprecated for about 35 years.
+1
> Yes, there is a warning for it in gcc, but
Here ever since r12-6022-gbb2a7f80a98de3 we stopped deeming the partial
specialization #2 to be more specialized than #1 ultimately because
dependent operator expressions now have a DEPENDENT_OPERATOR_TYPE type
instead of an empty type, and this made unify stop deducing T(2) == 1
for K during
> On Apr 28, 2022, at 8:37 AM, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
>
> I intend to commit this patch soon. This isn't changing the policy, just
> adjusting the docs to match the current policy.
>
> I'm open to suggestions for better ways to phrase the second sentence,
> clarifying that
Hi,
the attached patch documents the support for IEEE long double for
Fortran. OK? Suggestions for better wording?
Best regards
Thomas
Mention support for IEEE 128-bit long double for Fortran.
* htdocs/gcc-12/changes.html: Mention support for IEEE
128-bit long
[Jeff, this is the same patch I sent you last week with minor tweaks
to the commit message.]
[Despite the verbosity of the message, this is actually a pretty
straightforward patch. It should've gone in last cycle, but there
was a nagging regression I couldn't get to until after stage1
had
On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 9:10 AM Jeff Law via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> As I mentioned in the original thread, my change to pr94157_0 was an
> attempt to avoid these warnings by passing a magic flag to the linker.
> Of course we may not be using GNU ld. Or we may be on a non-elf target
> where the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105412
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
As I mentioned in the original thread, my change to pr94157_0 was an
attempt to avoid these warnings by passing a magic flag to the linker.
Of course we may not be using GNU ld. Or we may be on a non-elf target
where the flag I used doesn't exist. Or we may even be on a ELF target
where
On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 03:56:18PM +0200, Matthias Kretz wrote:
> On Thursday, 28 April 2022 08:09:54 CEST Alexandre Oliva via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
> > libstdc++'s bits/simd.h section for PPC (Altivec) defines various
> > intrinsic vector types that are only available along with VSX: 64-bit
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95381
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12/13 Regression]: |[11 Regression]: Build
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88200
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
Summary|[9/10/11/12/13
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98341
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
Some tests check for fenv and then proceed to use fesetround() directly,
but some platforms (at least RISC-V soft-float) have fenv but don't
support rounding modes. This adds a DG check that fesetround() actually
functions, which is then used by all the tests that call fesetround()
explicitly.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105287
Avi Kivity changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||avi at scylladb dot com
--- Comment #10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105426
--- Comment #1 from Avi Kivity ---
Created attachment 52898
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52898=edit
reproducer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105426
Bug ID: 105426
Summary: [wrong-code][regression][coroutines] range-for
temporaries are not persisted in coroutines
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
1 - 100 of 265 matches
Mail list logo
