[Bug c++/59633] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] ICE with __attribute((vector_size(...))) for enum

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59633 Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last

[Bug c++/59633] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] ICE with __attribute((vector_size(...))) for enum

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59633 --- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: jason Date: Thu Jan 30 14:21:31 2014 New Revision: 207302 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207302root=gccview=rev Log: PR c++/59633 gcc/ * tree.c

[Bug c++/59633] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] ICE with __attribute((vector_size(...))) for enum

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59633 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.7.4

[Bug c++/59633] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] ICE with __attribute((vector_size(...))) for enum

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59633 --- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Volker Reichelt from comment #2) Well, because the C-frontend compiles it, the C++-frontend used to compile it and even clang (3.2) compiles it, I was under the

[Bug c++/59633] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] ICE with __attribute((vector_size(...))) for enum

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59633 --- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org --- What makes you think the code is valid? From the doc, I think this should be rejected (with a proper error message).

[Bug c++/59633] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] ICE with __attribute((vector_size(...))) for enum

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59633 --- Comment #2 from Volker Reichelt reichelt at gcc dot gnu.org --- What makes you think the code is valid? From the doc, I think this should be rejected (with a proper error message). Well, because the C-frontend compiles it, the C++-frontend