20180321 (experimental) [trunk revision 258722] (GCC)
$
$ g++tk tmp.cpp
tmp.cpp:3:18: internal compiler error: in instantiate_type, at cp/class.c:8062
int t = A::A ? : 0;
^
0x6f4360 instantiate_type(tree_node*, tree_node*, int)
../../gcc-source-trunk/gcc/cp/class.c:8062
0x6cffea
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70870
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77941
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84942
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |UNCONFIRMED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85026
Bug ID: 85026
Summary: [7 Regression] Error: branch out of range on
arm-linux-gnueabihf
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84943
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
On 03/21/2018 10:10 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
> On 03/02/2018 05:55 PM, Cesar Philippidis wrote:
>> In addition, nvptx_cta_sync and the corresponding nvptx_barsync insn,
>> have been extended to take a barrier ID and a thread count. The idea
>> here is to assign one barrier for each logical vector.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81311
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Mar 22 03:53:19 2018
New Revision: 258755
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258755=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c++/81311 - wrong C++17 overload resolution.
* call.c
OK, thanks.
On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 11:48 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 11:27 PM, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> On Mar 20, 2018, Jason Merrill wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 6:07 PM, Alexandre Oliva
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82967
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
Here, the code in build_special_member_function to avoid involving the
copy constructor in initialization from a prvalue was causing wrongly
different overload resolution. To fix it, instead of trying to
produce a prvalue there, we now go through normal overload resolution
and then specifically
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85025
Bug ID: 85025
Summary: libgcc/config/i386/shadow-stack-unwind.h is wrong
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
On 3/21/18 5:16 PM, Carl Love wrote:
> The following patch is a back port from mainlin of a fix for
[snip]
>
> 2018-03-21 Carl Love
>
> * config/rs6000/r6000.c (rtx_is_swappable_p): Add case UNSPEC_VPERMXOR.
>
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>
> 2018-03-21 Carl Love
On 3/21/18 7:37 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 12:47:41PM -0500, Peter Bergner wrote:
>> I'll note that GCC 7 does not need any of the changes to rs6000-p8swap.c,
>> since that file doesn't exist and doesn't need to exist in GCC 7, so I've
>> left those changes out.
>
>
Hi Sudakshina,
As per the ARMv8 ARM, for the offset range (-1048576 ,1048572), the
far branch instruction offset is inclusive of both the offsets. Hence,
I am using <=||=> and not <||>= as it was in previous implementation.
On 16 March 2018 at 00:51, Sudakshina Das wrote:
> On
On Mar 21, 2018, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 11:27 PM, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> I understood you were saying it was ok to peek in this case. Would you
>> please state, for clarity, what your stance is on peeking in this case,
>>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84922
--- Comment #13 from Steve Kargl ---
On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 12:44:25AM +, w.clodius at icloud dot com wrote:
> --- Comment #12 from William Clodius ---
> FWIW I was told on comp.lang.fortran that the code is erroneous because of
>
> "The
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85024
--- Comment #2 from Aaron M. Ucko ---
Great, thanks! FTR, I'm fine without a backport here.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84922
--- Comment #12 from William Clodius ---
FWIW I was told on comp.lang.fortran that the code is erroneous because of
"The error message doesn't make much sense to me, but I think Note 12.2
in section 12.4.3.1 contains a clue to what's going on.
Tested on Linux-PPC64.
2018-03-22 Ville Voutilainen
gcc/cp/
Implement P0962
* parser.c (cp_parser_perform_range_for_lookup): Change
the condition for deciding whether to use members.
testsuite/
Implement P0962
*
On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 12:47:41PM -0500, Peter Bergner wrote:
> On 3/20/18 12:27 PM, Peter Bergner wrote:
> > On 3/20/18 11:42 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> >> On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 09:12:08PM -0500, Peter Bergner wrote:
> >>> Looking at mu build dirs insn-modes.h, I don't see HAVE_V8HFmode
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85024
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84269
--- Comment #7 from David Malcolm ---
Another one, from https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82967#c1
#include
void test (float pf, float inff)
{
assert (pf == inff);
}
: In function 'test':
:5:3: warning: implicit declaration of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82967
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |dmalcolm at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65428
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Snapshot gcc-6-20180321 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/6-20180321/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 6 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/gcc-6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85024
Bug ID: 85024
Summary: applyRelocations not implemented for alpha-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
When adding __builtin_tgmath to support a better tgmath.h
implementation, I noted that further changes might be needed regarding
the TS 18661 functions that round their results to a narrower type,
because of unresolved issues with how the corresponding type-generic
macros are defined in TS 18661.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84956
--- Comment #3 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #2)
> Created attachment 43722 [details]
> Tentative patch
Bootstrapped and reg-tested on x86_64, no issues found.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71965
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||deferred
Assignee|aoliva at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84922
--- Comment #11 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Patch submitted.
If an interface body includes a MODULE prefix on a subroutine
or function, then the prefix must appear on the contained
subprogram. This patch does that check, and issues an error
message.
2018-03-21 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/84922
* decl.c
GCC Maintainers:
The following patch is a back port from mainlin of a fix for
define_insn crypto_vpermxor_ in gcc/config/rs6000/crypto.md. The
issue is the vpermxor instruction does not work correctly when the swap
optimization is applied.
The issue was found as part of commit 258530 to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84999
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[7/8 Regression] ICE in |[7 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77691
--- Comment #12 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Wed, 21 Mar 2018, ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE wrote:
> Joseph, any suggestions? You mentioned that older versions of glibc
> didn't provide 16-byte alignment in i386 malloc;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84642
--- Comment #5 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Author: aoliva
Date: Wed Mar 21 22:08:19 2018
New Revision: 258748
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258748=gcc=rev
Log:
[PR c++/84610,84642] recover from implicit template parms gracefully
If we get
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71965
--- Comment #9 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Author: aoliva
Date: Wed Mar 21 22:08:34 2018
New Revision: 258749
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258749=gcc=rev
Log:
[PR c++/71965] silence multi-dim array init sorry without tf_error
We shouldn't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84610
--- Comment #4 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Author: aoliva
Date: Wed Mar 21 22:08:19 2018
New Revision: 258748
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258748=gcc=rev
Log:
[PR c++/84610,84642] recover from implicit template parms gracefully
If we get
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84997
--- Comment #5 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Wed, 21 Mar 2018, antoshkka at gmail dot com wrote:
> unsigned test02(unsigned lhs) {
> return lhs + 2.0; // No signed overflow
> }
If lhs is UINT_MAX or UINT_MAX - 1, the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84997
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Wed, 21 Mar 2018, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> > That would need -fno-trapping-math, because if the addition results in a
> > double value larger than INT_MAX, under Annex F the
On Mar 20, 2018, Jason Merrill wrote:
>> + if ((complain & tf_error))
>> + error ("cannot initialize multi-dimensional"
>> + " array with initializer");
> Let's also use the other diagnostic message: "array must be
> initialized
On Mar 20, 2018, Jason Merrill wrote:
>> -permerror (input_location,
>> - "parenthesized initializer in array new");
>> +error_at (input_location,
>> + "parenthesized initializer in array new");
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84999
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Mar 21 21:48:47 2018
New Revision: 258747
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258747=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c/84999
* c-typeck.c (build_binary_op): If
On Mar 20, 2018, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 5:57 PM, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> On Mar 20, 2018, Jason Merrill wrote:
> Let's put this in cp-tree.h, with warning_sentinel.
>> + (void)cleanup;
> There are lots of RAII
Hi!
On the following testcase, path isolation decides to duplicate a bb and
redirect edge from ENTRY bb to its successor to this duplicate bb and
tree cleanup then removes all other basic blocks as unreachable.
When blocks are removed, forced labels are moved to their bb->prev_bb block,
but
On Wed, 21 Mar 2018, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On ia32, we don't support __int128, nor mode (TI) integers, but we do
> support 128-bit __float128 and (generic) vectors containing it. The result
> of a comparison of such vectors is supposed to be integral vector with the
> same element
On Wed, 21 Mar 2018, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> Unfortunately it's a negative-sense define, that now at least most ports
> define. Do all ports define it? It's hard to determine that, because many
> ports get it set via config/gnu-user.h or similar common file.
Bare-metal ports often fail to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83789
--- Comment #24 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #23)
> This regtested fine on BE for me with no regressions. My LE
> bootstrap/regtest is still running.
My LE bootstrap and regtesting were clean too. Just
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84972
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[6/7/8 Regression] ICE: |[6/7 Regression] ICE: tree
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84972
--- Comment #9 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Wed Mar 21 21:19:03 2018
New Revision: 258746
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258746=gcc=rev
Log:
/cp
2018-03-21 Paolo Carlini
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84922
--- Comment #10 from Steve Kargl ---
On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 01:23:32PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 08:11:29PM +, w.clodius at icloud dot com wrote:
> > --- Comment #6 from William Clodius ---
> > My version of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84922
--- Comment #9 from Steve Kargl ---
On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 08:15:57PM +, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote:
> >subroutine copy_byte_data(data, copy)
> >1
> > Error: Shape mismatch in argument 'data'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84957
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84957
--- Comment #4 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Wed Mar 21 21:12:41 2018
New Revision: 258745
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258745=gcc=rev
Log:
2018-03-21 Thomas Koenig
Harald Anlauf
Hi Harald,
The attached obvious patch fixes a NULL pointer dereference.
Testcase derived from report. Changelogs below.
Regtested on i686-pc-linux-gnu.
Whoever reviews this, please feel free to commit.
Reviewed and committed as r258745.
Thanks for the patch!
Regards
Thomas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84961
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[7/8 Regression] ICE error: |[7 Regression] ICE error:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84982
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84960
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84811
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84960
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Mar 21 20:53:16 2018
New Revision: 258744
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258744=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/84960
* tree-cfg.c (remove_bb): Don't move
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84811
--- Comment #26 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Wed Mar 21 20:52:15 2018
New Revision: 258743
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258743=gcc=rev
Log:
poly_span_traits fixes (PR 84811)
This patch fixes incorrect
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84957
--- Comment #3 from Harald Anlauf ---
Patch posted at
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2018-03/msg00117.html
On March 21, 2018 9:24:06 PM GMT+01:00, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>Hi!
>
>On the following testcase, path isolation decides to duplicate a bb and
>redirect edge from ENTRY bb to its successor to this duplicate bb and
>tree cleanup then removes all other basic blocks as unreachable.
>
The attached obvious patch fixes a NULL pointer dereference.
Testcase derived from report. Changelogs below.
Regtested on i686-pc-linux-gnu.
Whoever reviews this, please feel free to commit.
Thanks,
Harald
2018-03-21 Harald Anlauf
PR fortran/84957
*
On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 01:01:38PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> >> Hmm, it would be nice to share this with the similar patterns in
> >> unary_complex_lvalue and cp_build_modify_expr.
>
> > You mean just outline the
> > if (TREE_SIDE_EFFECTS (TREE_OPERAND (lhs, 0)))
> > lhs =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77691
--- Comment #11 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
> (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #9)
>> So GCC's definition of max_align_t is not consistent with malloc in Solaris
>
> Oh, I'm
Hi!
On ia32, we don't support __int128, nor mode (TI) integers, but we do
support 128-bit __float128 and (generic) vectors containing it. The result
of a comparison of such vectors is supposed to be integral vector with the
same element size, but we really don't want to allow one in this case,
On 03/21/2018 08:49 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
> On 03/02/2018 08:18 PM, Cesar Philippidis wrote:
>
>> og7-vl-part4-hooks.diff
>
>> diff --git a/gcc/config/nvptx/nvptx.c b/gcc/config/nvptx/nvptx.c
>> index 5642941c6a3..507c8671704 100644
>> --- a/gcc/config/nvptx/nvptx.c
>> +++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84922
--- Comment #8 from Steve Kargl ---
On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 08:11:29PM +, w.clodius at icloud dot com wrote:
> --- Comment #6 from William Clodius ---
> My version of gfortran, 7.1, doesn’t give the first message, which is correct.
> The
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84982
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Mar 21 20:20:40 2018
New Revision: 258742
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258742=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/84982
* gimple-ssa-store-merging.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84961
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Mar 21 20:19:33 2018
New Revision: 258741
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258741=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c++/84961
* cp-tree.h (genericize_compound_lvalue): Declare.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84922
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> My version of gfortran gives
>
> gfcx -c a.f90
> a.f90:4:38:
>
>module subroutine copy_byte_data(data, copy)
> 1
> a.f90:12:31:
>
>subroutine
On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 02:55:36PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 2:37 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 08:55:59AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> >> On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 7:49 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> >> > On
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84922
--- Comment #6 from William Clodius ---
My version of gfortran, 7.1, doesn’t give the first message, which is correct.
The second message is incorrect. Either the clashing procedures should not be
compared further, or the comparison of the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84922
--- Comment #5 from William Clodius ---
The code is definitely invalid, but the misleading error message did result in
significant time lost by assuming the message was correct as to the problem.
Note several other attempts to fix the problem
On 03/21/2018 12:38 PM, Janne Blomqvist wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 7:29 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 03/21/2018 11:25 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>> On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 12:41:25PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
This is documented in the old manuals from DEC and I've found
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85008
--- Comment #3 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Author: nathan
Date: Wed Mar 21 19:22:10 2018
New Revision: 258738
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258738=gcc=rev
Log:
[PR c++/85008] ICE looking for clone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84912
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85008
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84912
--- Comment #4 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #3)
> + bool nonvoid = TREE_TYPE (TREE_TYPE (fndecl)) != void_type_node;
Cut and pasted too much, please ignore the unneeded line above.
This ICE turned out to be a latent bug exposed by moving the member fns
onto the FIELDS list.
We should be using DECL_CLONED_FUNCTION_P not DECL_CLONED_FUNCTION.
Grepping showed another place (doing a similar linkage check) affected too.
nathan
--
Nathan Sidwell
2018-03-21 Nathan Sidwell
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84912
--- Comment #3 from Peter Bergner ---
The following patch changes the ICE to an error:
[bergner@makalu-lp1 PR84912]$ cat divde.i
long
div_de (long a, long b)
{
return __builtin_divde (a, b);
}
[bergner@makalu-lp1 PR84912]$
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61754
--- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor ---
I suspect __attribute__((deprecated)) doesn't work quite the way you would like
in C++ either. It only happens to do what you expect (i.e., not trigger a
warning) in the case in comment #0 but not in others,
>On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 9:50 AM, Sebastiaan Peters
> wrote:
>>>On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 3:49 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
On Tue, 2018-03-20 at 14:02 +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 9:55 PM, Richard Biener
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84922
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83789
--- Comment #23 from Peter Bergner ---
Created attachment 43728
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43728=edit
Backport of trunk patch to GCC 7
Kaushik, can you verify the attached backported patch fixes the ICE on GCC 7?
This
On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 2:37 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 08:55:59AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 7:49 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
>> > On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 02:06:36PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
>> >> On
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32770
Bug 32770 depends on bug 84615, which changed state.
Bug 84615 Summary: [8 Regression] Executable Segfault for some tests compiled
with -m32 after r256284
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84615
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84615
Janne Blomqvist changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84995
--- Comment #2 from Дилян Палаузов ---
gcc-ar always uses the latest plugin:
$ cat t.c
#include
int main() {
printf("Z\n");
}
$ x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc-6.4.1 -flto t.c -C -o t.o
$ strace gcc-ar rc t.a t.o prints:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84615
--- Comment #20 from Janne Blomqvist ---
Author: jb
Date: Wed Mar 21 18:46:44 2018
New Revision: 258736
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258736=gcc=rev
Log:
PR 84615 Regressions due to type mismatch with character functions
Since the kind
Dear Mr./Mrs,
First of all, I really appreciate your time and attention. I am Ismael El
Houas an aerospace engineer student with knowledge of Google Cloud Platform
and I want to express my interest in working on your project.
Secondly, I want to ask if I am still at a time to apply to this
On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 7:29 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 03/21/2018 11:25 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 12:41:25PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
>>> This is documented in the old manuals from DEC and I've found
>>> essentially the same documentation in Oracle/Sun's
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54551
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
CC|
On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 08:55:59AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 7:49 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 02:06:36PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> >> On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 11:59 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> >> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47389
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84994
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|9.0 |8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84994
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84994
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Wed Mar 21 18:21:39 2018
New Revision: 258731
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258731=gcc=rev
Log:
C++: show private field accessor hints with -g and optimization (PR c++/84994)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84926
Дилян Палаузов changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|INVALID
1 - 100 of 305 matches
Mail list logo