http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57900
Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gdr at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58239
--- Comment #9 from Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #8)
note that the patch at:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-08/msg01460.html
is not quite enough to fix this on Darwin - since we
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58239
--- Comment #12 from Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #10)
also the gcc driver silently ignores -static-libstdc++.
Isn't this the problem?
certainly, the -B options are passed when other gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58239
--- Comment #1 from Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Here is the definition of pretty_printer::~pretty_printer ()
at the location indicated:
pretty_printer::~pretty_printer ()
{
buffer-~output_buffer ();
XDELETE (buffer
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58239
--- Comment #2 from Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at gcc dot gnu.org ---
OK, I see the emitted reference to 'operator delete', and I suspect I
have an idea of why the compiler generated this reference even though
it isn't used anywhere in the input source
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58239
--- Comment #5 from Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
(In reply to Gabriel Dos Reis from comment #2)
OK, I see the emitted reference to 'operator delete', and I suspect I
have an idea
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58239
--- Comment #6 from Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #4)
OK, I see the emitted reference to 'operator delete', and I suspect I
have an idea of why the compiler generated this reference even
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58239
--- Comment #7 from Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #4)
OK, I see the emitted reference to 'operator delete', and I suspect I
have an idea of why the compiler generated this reference even
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57997
--- Comment #2 from Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #1)
Gaby, can you help me with this?
I think this is typical confusion about what valarray expressions are.
f1() has some complicated return
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57997
--- Comment #3 from Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Also, there might be some interactions with move semantics; I don't know.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57974
--- Comment #11 from Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #10)
Gaby, do you have an opinion on this? Irrespective of the long double issue,
do you want me to re-enable (contra LWG 844) the pow(const
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
--- Comment #30 from Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #27)
DR2058 is now WP, thus we are supposed to reassess this. Now, according to
the resolution, additional 'begin' and 'end' overloads shall
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11582
--- Comment #8 from Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-22
10:10:36 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
The '[(((sizetype)anonymous) + 1)]' is just awful. If we don't know the
actual type there, that is int [size()], then we
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11582
--- Comment #10 from Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-23
03:45:56 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
(In reply to comment #8)
Printing int[] or int[size_t] would be confusing too.
More confusing than int[(((sizetype)anonymous
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54401
Bug #: 54401
Summary: Missing diagnostics about type-alias at class scope
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54401
Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52863
Bug #: 52863
Summary: Enable -Wall by default
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22200
Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gdr at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50880
Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gdr at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50880
--- Comment #14 from Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-02
12:27:20 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
Created attachment 25654 [details]
BC2
Since we are talking about branch cut and prespectiving
since zeros, I think we should
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50880
--- Comment #17 from Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-02
12:48:23 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #16)
Well, I guess this would be most of it:
templatetypename _Tp
std::complex_Tp
__complex_acosh(const std::complex_Tp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50880
--- Comment #18 from Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-11-02
12:48:47 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #16)
Well, I guess this would be most of it:
templatetypename _Tp
std::complex_Tp
__complex_acosh(const std::complex_Tp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
--- Comment #24 from Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-06-14
13:54:13 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #18)
It should be identical to
auto range = v1 + v2;
for (auto b = std::begin(range), e = std::end(range); b != e; ++b
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
--- Comment #25 from Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-06-14
14:01:30 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #23)
Ok, now I see, it's the operator[] of _BinBase which returns by value, I
overlooked that.
Yes, val in valarray stands for value
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48365
Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gdr at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gdr at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
--- Comment #7 from Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-05-17
15:14:04 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
Double Sigh! I was hoping very few overloads would be enough... If we are
really talking about many I would be in favor of raising
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
--- Comment #13 from Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-05-17
16:24:57 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
All in all, now that I understand the issue with the temporary, this seems
really sort of a NAD, maybe the wording needs only
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49022
--- Comment #12 from Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-05-17
16:23:37 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
For sure that works.
Gaby, just to make sure we are on the same page: did you send a message to the
reflector about this issue
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48760
--- Comment #30 from Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-04-29
23:52:32 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #29)
This is now fixed in 4_6-branch too in C++03 mode, not in C++0x mode, where we
would need list-initialization of __complex__
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48760
--- Comment #14 from Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-04-26
14:12:35 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
(In reply to comment #9)
I guess, in the 4.6.1 time frame we can only workaround the issue in C++03
mode
by doing
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48760
Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gdr at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48760
Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at redhat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48101
Summary: obscure error message with std::setconst int
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46983
Gabriel Dos Reis gdr at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
35 matches
Mail list logo
