dia0,a0,0xff
> lw ra,12(sp)
> lw s0,8(sp)
> addisp,sp,16
> jr ra
> .size atomic, .-atomic
> .ident "GCC: (GNU) 9.0.0 20180530 (experimental)"
h_add_1
> addia0,a0,1
> andia0,a0,0xff
> fence iorw,iorw
> lbu a5,0(s0)
> fence iorw,iorw
> add a0,a0,a5
> andia0,a0,0xff
> lw ra,12(sp)
> lw s0,8(sp)
> addisp,sp,16
> jr ra
> .size atomic, .-atomic
> .ident "GCC: (GNU) 9.0.0 20180530 (experimental)"
add a0,a0,a5
andia0,a0,0xff
lw ra,12(sp)
lw s0,8(sp)
addisp,sp,16
jr ra
.size atomic, .-atomic
.ident "GCC: (GNU) 9.0.0 20180530 (experimental)"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86011
Bug ID: 86011
Summary: Inefficient code generated for ldivmod with constant
value
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Hi Bin,
Thanks for the review. Please find the revised patch based on the
review comments.
Thanks,
Kugan
On 17 May 2018 at 19:56, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 2:39 AM, Kugan Vivekanandarajah
> wrote:
>> Hi Richard,
>>
>> On 6 March 2018 at 02:24, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> On
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86010
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86010
Bug ID: 86010
Summary: [7/8 Regression] redundant memset with smaller size
not eliminated
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86009
Bug ID: 86009
Summary: [Concepts] Placeholder as argument to
partial-concept-id forms extra constrained parameters
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79751
Hubert Tong changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hstong at ca dot ibm.com
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86008
Bug ID: 86008
Summary: std::quoted(std::basic_string_view) is missing
Product: gcc
Version: 8.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85662
roland at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85995
--- Comment #2 from Vincent Lefèvre ---
I don't see the point of defining both __STDC__ and __STDC_VERSION__ if GCC
cannot guarantee anything about standard conformance. With the current state,
it is not possible to test these macros in order to
On 05/28/2018 06:54 AM, Jozef Lawrynowicz wrote:
> Fix -fleading-underscore having no effect for msp430-elf by prepending
> user_label_prefix to name when outputting assembly labels.
>
> Successfully regtested the GCC testsuite for msp430-elf, and this fixed
> unwind-1.c from dg.exp.
>
> If the
On 05/28/2018 06:25 AM, Jozef Lawrynowicz wrote:
> With the changes in r250911 to canonicalize attribute names (i.e. remove
> leading and trailing underscores if present) a comment for "handler" in
> the attribute_spec struct needs to be updated to reflect that the NAME
> argument
>
> is now
On 05/28/2018 05:23 AM, Jozef Lawrynowicz wrote:
> pr39240.c fails at execution at -O1 and above for msp430, due to an erroneous
>
> subreg expression in the zero_extendqisi2 msp430 insn pattern. This causes the
>
> zero extension operation to get optimized out.
>
> The attached patch fixes the
On 05/25/2018 05:10 PM, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
> 2018-05-26 Rasmus Villemoes
>
> libgcc/
> * crtstuff.c: Remove declaration of _Jv_RegisterClasses.
Thanks. Installed on the trunk.
Jeff
On 05/18/2018 05:58 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
> The -Walloc-size-larger-than= option is supposed make it possible
> to disable the warning by specifying a limit that's larger than
> the default of PTRDIFF_MAX (the handler for the option argument
> gets around the INT_MAX maximum for numeric
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed May 30 23:13:48 2018
New Revision: 260979
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260979=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c++/7 improve location for diagnostic
Pass in the location of the invalid
On 05/03/2018 03:55 AM, Nick Clifton wrote:
> Hi Jeff,
>
> Thanks for the review.
>
>> The docs still say "Control characters in the string will be replaced
>> with spaces", but they're being escaped now. That needs to be fixed.
>
> Done.
>
>> I note you overload the cast operator in your
On 04/22/2018 01:17 PM, dave.pa...@oracle.com wrote:
> This patch fixes handling of -Werror=return-type as well as
> -Wno-return-type. Currently, -Werror=return-type does not turn the
> warnings into errors and -Wno-return-type does not turn off
> warning/error. Now they both work as expected.
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55976
--- Comment #11 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Wed May 30 22:55:38 2018
New Revision: 260978
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260978=gcc=rev
Log:
2018-05-30 David Pagan
PR c/55976
* c-decl.c (grokdeclarator):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85591
--- Comment #1 from Ștefan Talpalaru ---
I can confirm this on an FX-8320E.
Snapshot gcc-6-20180530 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/6-20180530/
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=86007
Bug ID: 86007
Summary: precompiled header on bdver2 with -march=native
triggers a "created and used with differing settings
of '-mlwp'" warning, intermittently
Product: gcc
On 03/14/2018 10:35 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> here's an attempt to document some of the inline asm operand modifiers
> which make sense and which get used so that people can find what they
> mean in the docs.
>
> This is my first gcc patch so there might be clumsiness ahead. :)
>
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86004
--- Comment #1 from Jan Hubicka ---
Can you please check in g++.log what kind of error you get?
Incremental linking now produce LTO objects while previously it did produce
final binary. I went through testcases where this makes difference and
On 05/30/2018 03:37 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 4:58 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
>
>> On 05/28/2018 03:11 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 10:15 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
>>>
Attached is revision 3 of the patch incorporating your
> On 05/30/2018 12:27 PM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> >On Wed, 30 May 2018, Martin Sebor wrote:
> >>I think your r260956 is missing the following hunk:
> >
> >If this fixes the bootstrap for you (also ran into this myself
> >just now), can you please go ahead and commit?
> >
> >We can always sort out
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85369
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Wed May 30 22:24:43 2018
New Revision: 260976
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260976=gcc=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/85369 - no -Wstringop-overflow for a strcpy / stpcpy call with a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85369
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86006
Bug ID: 86006
Summary: compile time error generic type bound procedure
Product: gcc
Version: 8.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
OK.
On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 4:28 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> Pass in the location of the invalid expression, not the next input
> location (which might be a comma or closing parenthesis on a different
> line).
>
> gcc/cp:
>
> PR c++/7
> * call.c (resolve_args): Use location
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85879
cesar at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||openacc
--- Comment #3 from
We are failing to deduce the template parameter N here
template
void foo(const long int (&)[N]) {}
void bar() {
foo ({1,2,3});
}
because of the type mismatch; parm is long int (element type of the array),
while arg is int (element type of {1, 2, 3}), and unify doesn't like that:
lw s0,8(sp)
addisp,sp,16
jr ra
.size atomic, .-atomic
.ident "GCC: (GNU) 9.0.0 20180530 (experimental)"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86004
Bug ID: 86004
Summary: [9 regression] Several lto test cases begin failing
with r260963
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
On 5/30/18, David Malcolm wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-05-30 at 13:25 -0400, Eric Gallager wrote:
>> On 5/29/18, David Malcolm wrote:
>> > This patch is the JSON patch I posted last year;
>> > it adds support to gcc for reading and writing JSON,
>> > based on DOM-like trees of json::value instances.
>>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85977
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85977
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
// PR c++/85977, Incorrect handling of array reference size deduction
// { dg-do compile { target c++11 } }
template
void fn1 (const char (&)[N]) { static_assert (N == 3, "fn1");}
template
void fn2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85956
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor
The syntactically valid but undefined test case submitted in bug
85956 shows that the pretty-printer ICEs when passed a pointer
to variable-length array whose upper bound is an error-mark-node.
The ICE is triggered by -Warray-bounds discovering that a negative
subscript into the VLA is
Pass in the location of the invalid expression, not the next input
location (which might be a comma or closing parenthesis on a different
line).
gcc/cp:
PR c++/7
* call.c (resolve_args): Use location of expression, not current input
location.
gcc/testsuite:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85998
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85989
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85976
--- Comment #6 from Sylwester Arabas ---
BTW, according to this gcc www entry, Blitz++ seems to listed as a part of GCC
test suite: https://gcc.gnu.org/testing/testing-blitz.html
Is this information up to date?
Was this issue somehow triggered
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77513
--- Comment #8 from Ville Voutilainen ---
See r260973
On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 12:51 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 2:44 PM, Peryt, Sebastian
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have made some cleaning to remove redundancy in includes call of some of
>> the headers in x86intrin.h.
>> Removed headers were included in both x86intrin.h and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77513
Ville Voutilainen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ville.voutilainen at gmail dot
com
On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 2:44 PM, Peryt, Sebastian
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have made some cleaning to remove redundancy in includes call of some of
> the headers in x86intrin.h.
> Removed headers were included in both x86intrin.h and immintrin.h which is
> included into x86intrin.h.
>
> Is it ok for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85998
--- Comment #5 from Jeff Hammond ---
> Finishing C++17 support in libstdc++ is already one of our top priorities for
> GCC 9. There's no need to ask for it, and doing so won't affect priorities.
> The missing pieces are documented:
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85920
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947
Bug 53947 depends on bug 85920, which changed state.
Bug 85920 Summary: Incomplete transition to IFNs for scatter/gather support,
drop vectorize.builtin_{gather,scatter} target hooks
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85920
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85919
Bug ID: 85919
Summary: Incomplete transition to IFNs for scatter/gather
support, drop vectorize.builtin_{gather,scatter}
target hooks
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86003
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85807
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed May 30 19:31:11 2018
New Revision: 260972
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260972=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c++/85807 - ICE with call in template NSDMI.
* init.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81401
Paul Eggert changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||eggert at gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from
The problem in this testcase was that we were calling get_nsdmi from
template context, and then calling set_flags_from_callee on the
resulting CALL_EXPR, which doesn't work in a template. Furthermore,
we would then store the template-context trees for the NSDMI in the
hash table, where they would
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85958
Tavian Barnes changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tavianator at gmail dot com
--- Comment
On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 3:00 PM, Ville Voutilainen
wrote:
> On 30 May 2018 at 18:32, Ville Voutilainen
> wrote:
>> Now it does. This passes all the Wzero-as-null-pointer-constant tests in
>> warn/
>> and cpp0x/, running full suite on Linux-PPC64. Ok for trunk if the tests
>> pass?
>
> Here we
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85998
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85977
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Seems like deducing the template parameter N fails because of the type
mismatch; parm is long int (element type of the array), while arg is int
(element type of {1, 2, 3}):
21789 /* We have already
On 30 May 2018 at 18:32, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
> Now it does. This passes all the Wzero-as-null-pointer-constant tests in warn/
> and cpp0x/, running full suite on Linux-PPC64. Ok for trunk if the tests
> pass?
Here we go again. :)
2018-05-30 Ville Voutilainen
gcc/cp/
Do not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85998
--- Comment #3 from Jeff Hammond ---
Other projects use the existence of feature requests in their bug tracker for
prioritization of development. How does GCC manage this information? How do
you track GCC roadmap development if not through
Wilco Dijkstra writes:
> Richard Sandiford
>> The "?" change seems to make intrinsic sense given the extra cost of the
>> GPR alternative. But I think the real reason for this failure is that
>> we define no V1DF patterns, and target-independent code falls back to
>> using moves in the
On 05/30/2018 12:27 PM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
On Wed, 30 May 2018, Martin Sebor wrote:
I think your r260956 is missing the following hunk:
If this fixes the bootstrap for you (also ran into this myself
just now), can you please go ahead and commit?
We can always sort out things later, if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86003
Bug ID: 86003
Summary: [8 Regression] GCC fails to build when configured
--with-cpu=xscale
Product: gcc
Version: 8.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
On Wed, 30 May 2018, Martin Sebor wrote:
> I think your r260956 is missing the following hunk:
If this fixes the bootstrap for you (also ran into this myself
just now), can you please go ahead and commit?
We can always sort out things later, if there are details to be
tweaked, but fixing a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86002
Bug ID: 86002
Summary: ICE with requires in constexpr if condition
Product: gcc
Version: 8.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85956
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86001
Bug ID: 86001
Summary: explicit default constructor not allowed in anonymous
aggregate
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86000
Bug ID: 86000
Summary: ICE with requires statement in a non constexpr if
Product: gcc
Version: 8.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Honza,
I think your r260956 is missing the following hunk:
Index: include/simple-object.h
===
--- include/simple-object.h (revision 260969)
+++ include/simple-object.h (working copy)
@@ -203,7 +203,7 @@
On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 11:28:13AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 04/27/2018 05:00 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
> > I'm sending patch that removes MPX. It preserves all options
> > -fcheck-pointer-bounds, -fchkp-* and -mmpx
> > target option. These options are now NOP. On the contrary following options
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85873
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed May 30 17:33:06 2018
New Revision: 260969
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260969=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c++/85873 - constant initializer_list array not in .rodata.
*
Hi Jan,
>> > Index: include/simple-object.h
>> > ===
>> > --- include/simple-object.h (revision 260042)
>> > +++ include/simple-object.h (working copy)
>> > @@ -198,12 +198,15 @@
>> > simple_object_release_write
On Wed, 2018-05-30 at 13:25 -0400, Eric Gallager wrote:
> On 5/29/18, David Malcolm wrote:
> > This patch is the JSON patch I posted last year;
> > it adds support to gcc for reading and writing JSON,
> > based on DOM-like trees of json::value instances.
> >
> > This is overkill for what's
My recent patch for -Winit-list-lifetime added a warning for returning
a temporary initializer_list, but the bug report is correct that we
*could* promote the constant array to .rodata as an optimization, did
in GCC 7, and don't in GCC 8. That we did in GCC 7 was for the wrong
reason, because we
On 5/29/18, David Malcolm wrote:
> This patch is the JSON patch I posted last year;
> it adds support to gcc for reading and writing JSON,
> based on DOM-like trees of json::value instances.
>
> This is overkill for what's needed by the rest of the
> patch kit (which just needs to be able to
> On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 8:05 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > Hi,
> > for incremental linking of LTO objects we need to copy debug sections from
> > source object files into destination without renaming them from
> > .gnu.debuglto
> > into the standard debug section (because they will again be LTO
On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 8:05 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> Hi,
> for incremental linking of LTO objects we need to copy debug sections from
> source object files into destination without renaming them from .gnu.debuglto
> into the standard debug section (because they will again be LTO debug section
>
> Hi,
>
> just small nits:
>
> On Tue, May 08 2018, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > Hi,
> > this patch adds documentation of -flinker-output.
> >
> > * doc/invoke.texi (-flinker-output): Document
> > Index: doc/invoke.texi
> > ===
> >
> On Tue, 8 May 2018, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> > this patch adds the symtab support for LTO incremental linking. Most of the
> > code path is same for both modes of incremental link except hat we want to
> > produce LTO object file rather than compile down to assembly.
> >
> > Only
The following fixes behavior of IPA PTA with IFUNCs. Those were
treated as simple aliases (since ->alias is set) and thus we
just considered the ifunc resolver as body. The following instead
associates an IFUNC call with an indirect call to a var initialized
from the resolver result.
> On 05/23/2018 09:54 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> >> On 05/08/2018 09:31 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>> this patch tells dwarf2out that it can have early debug not only in WPA
> >>> mode
> >>> but also when incrementally linking. This prevents ICE on almost every
> >>> testcase
> >>>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85999
Bug ID: 85999
Summary: 416.gamess slowed down by BB vectorization
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 08:45:22AM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > If you need to keep g for compatibility (you do), then why not just have
> > e (long double is double)
> > g (long double when matching __ibm128, or explicit __ibm128)
> > u9__ieee128 (long double when matching __ieee128, or
On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 11:25 AM Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 5:24 PM Allan Sandfeld Jensen
> wrote:
> > On Dienstag, 29. Mai 2018 16:57:56 CEST Richard Biener wrote:
> > >
> > > so the situation improves but isn't fully fixed (STLF issues maybe?)
> > >
> > That raises the
On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 11:32 AM, Segher Boessenkool
wrote:
> On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 11:03:39AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
>> On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 9:45 AM, Segher Boessenkool
>> wrote:
>> > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 03:15:21PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> >> On Wed, May 30, 2018 at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85956
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83962
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
It hasn't been backported to 7.x/6.x, so no, unless we decide not to backport
it there.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83852
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bergner at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83962
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bergner at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
> > @@ -1108,9 +1109,12 @@
> > file_offset = (off_t) loffset;
> > }
> >fd = open (filename, O_RDONLY | O_BINARY);
> > + /* Linker plugin passes -fresolution and -flinker-output options. */
> >if (fd == -1)
> > {
> > lto_argv[lto_argc++] = argv[i];
> > +
On 30/05/18 16:11, Sudakshina Das wrote:
> Hi Andre
>
> On 30/05/18 11:41, Sudakshina Das wrote:
>> On 19/05/18 04:12, James Greenhalgh wrote:
>>>
On 8 May 2018, at 02:58, Andre Vieira (lists)
wrote:
Hi Richard,
> On 07/05/18 11:14, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> "Andre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83009
--- Comment #10 from avieira at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: avieira
Date: Wed May 30 15:59:14 2018
New Revision: 260957
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260957=gcc=rev
Log:
Reverting r260635
gcc
2018-05-30 Andre Vieira
On 30 May 2018 at 18:12, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 30 May 2018 at 11:40, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>> gcc with -Wmain warns for local variables named main.
>>
>> int foo()
>> {
>> int main = 0;
>> return main;
>> }
>>
>> a.c: In function ‘foo’:
>> a.c:3:7: warning: ‘main’ is usually a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85998
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
On 30 May 2018 at 18:12, Jason Merrill wrote:
> Hmm, why doesn't maybe_warn_zero_as_null_pointer_constant check
> null_node_p like it does NULLPTR_TYPE_P?
Now it does. This passes all the Wzero-as-null-pointer-constant tests in warn/
and cpp0x/, running full suite on Linux-PPC64. Ok for trunk if
On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 11:03:39AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 9:45 AM, Segher Boessenkool
> wrote:
> > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 03:15:21PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >> On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 12:58:49PM +, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> >> > This patch changes the
1 - 100 of 205 matches
Mail list logo
