https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93165
--- Comment #2 from ncm at cantrip dot org ---
Created attachment 47593
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47593=edit
a makefile
This duplicates code found on the linked archive.
E.g.:
make all
make CC=g++-9 INDEXED
make
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93165
--- Comment #1 from ncm at cantrip dot org ---
Created attachment 47592
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47592=edit
code demonstrating the failure
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93165
Bug ID: 93165
Summary: avoidable 2x penalty on unpredicted overwrite
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69047
--- Comment #11 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #7)
Note I think this introduced a small optimization issue. I have a patch but I
have not been able to find a testcase which shows this issue without an
modified
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93163
Jiangning Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92156
Takatoshi Kondo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||redboltz at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93164
--- Comment #1 from David Fink ---
Also reported to clang:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43944
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93164
Bug ID: 93164
Summary: variadic template function passed an initializer list
fails with argument count mismatch error rather than
expected "couldn't deduce template parameter" error
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93077
--- Comment #4 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Yea. And note that Jason has committed a fix for 93033. I'll be spinning up
builds with today's snapshot in a few hours -- starting with all the stuff
that's currently failing. So we should know fairly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93076
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||93033
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93163
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||93033
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93163
--- Comment #1 from Jiangning Liu ---
Created attachment 47591
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47591=edit
bad case from llvm build
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93163
Bug ID: 93163
Summary: internal compiler error: verify_gimple failed
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93077
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93076
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90142
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
P.S. I asked you to follow the correct procedure because I can't approve that
patch myself, and the people who can approve it expect patches on the mailing
lists, not here.
If you want the right people to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90142
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
If you don't want the patch ignored, follow the procedure for submitting
patches.
If you refuse to do that, don't blame other people for not dealing with the
patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90142
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64271
--- Comment #14 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Roland Illig from comment #12)
> After all, these patches are only a suggestion how GCC _might_ be fixed.
Which is exactly why patches should go to the mailing lists. The reviewer might
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93151
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93161
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64271
--- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Roland Illig from comment #12)
> It should not be the job of a bug reporter to understand all the
> internal workflows and actually commit the patches in the end.
"Send the patch to the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64271
Roland Illig changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roland.illig at gmx dot de
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93156
--- Comment #8 from Bruno Haible ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
> a?-1:0 is transformed into -1 before we figure out that a is always true; an
> ordering difference.
Fortunately the GCC optimization affects only the return
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93156
Bruno Haible changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bruno at clisp dot org
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93162
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93162
Bug ID: 93162
Summary: [10 Regression] gcc/fortran/trans-openmp.c:2469:50:
runtime error: load of value 145992800, which is not a
valid value for type 'ar_type' since r279628
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93161
Bug ID: 93161
Summary: Remove extra operator== for comparison categories in
not in standard
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45734
--- Comment #9 from Alexander Cherepanov ---
DR 1116 is said to be resolved by P0137R1[1]. By looking through it, I don't
see how it covers testcases from this pr where "right" pointer is used (like
the example in comment 0). And it even
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90142
--- Comment #2 from Roland Illig ---
Please just ignore the patch, if that's easier.
Portable shell programs should not use the == operator for test(1).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93160
Bug ID: 93160
Summary: ICE: in expand_expr_addr_expr_1, at expr.c:8070
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93141
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sun Jan 5 12:52:24 2020
New Revision: 279887
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=279887=gcc=rev
Log:
PR target/93141
* config/i386/i386.md (SWIDWI): New mode iterator.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93138
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sun Jan 5 12:50:40 2020
New Revision: 279886
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=279886=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c++/93138
* parser.c (cp_parser_check_class_key): Disable access
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93155
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Loew ---
After reading the standard carefully, I figured out that this is not an error
since the rewrite as function templates is ambiguous:
template struct mp_similar_impl {};
template
void f(mp_similar_impl) {}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46244
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92657
Arnd Bergmann changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arnd at linaro dot org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91728
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91782
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87797
--- Comment #2 from Thomas Koenig ---
Could be made an addition to -Wintrinsic-shadow.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93155
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Loew ---
// here is a minimal example (extracted from boost/mp11/function.hpp)
template
struct s{};
template struct mp_similar_impl;
template struct mp_similar_impl
{
using type = int;
};
// commenting the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45596
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93159
Bug ID: 93159
Summary: [10 Regression] ICE (segfault) during RTL pass on
arm-linux-gnueabihf
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
42 matches
Mail list logo
