[Bug c++/104426] -fsanitize=undefined causes constexpr failures

2024-05-15 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104426 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/104426] -fsanitize=undefined causes constexpr failures

2022-02-08 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104426 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 52369 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52369=edit gcc12-pr104426.patch Untested fix. This stops the implied setting of -fno-delete-null-pointer-checks for sanitizers

[Bug c++/104426] -fsanitize=undefined causes constexpr failures

2022-02-08 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104426 --- Comment #5 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3) > That's a consequence of -fsanitize=undefined turning on > -fno-delete-null-pointer-checks (it has to, otherwise -fsanitize=null > wouldn't work properly). >

[Bug c++/104426] -fsanitize=undefined causes constexpr failures

2022-02-07 Thread pdimov at gmail dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104426 --- Comment #4 from Peter Dimov --- FWIW, I agree with everything Martin Sebor says in PR71962. -fallow-address-zero is an entirely separate feature, and shouldn't be implied by -fsanitize=undefined.

[Bug c++/104426] -fsanitize=undefined causes constexpr failures

2022-02-07 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104426 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c++/104426] -fsanitize=undefined causes constexpr failures

2022-02-07 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104426 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- And PR 67762

[Bug c++/104426] -fsanitize=undefined causes constexpr failures

2022-02-07 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104426 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- Maybe a dup of my PR 71962