https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108268
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108268
Bug ID: 108268
Summary: [13 Regression] Build failure on cross from
powerpc64le-linux to nvptx-none
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
> Hi,
>
> I'm re-posting patches which I have posted at the end of stage 1 but
> which have not passed review yet.
>
> 8<
>
> While modifying the code, I realized that we do look into statements
> even when there are no
Hi,
I'm re-posting patches which I have posted at the end of stage 1 but
which have not passed review yet.
8<
While modifying the code, I realized that we do look into statements
even when there are no replacements. This patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100972
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100972
Bernhard Reutner-Fischer changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Hi,
while modifying the code, I realized that we do look into statements
even when there are no replacements. This patch adds the necessary
early bail-outs to avoid that.
ipa_param_body_adjustments::modify_call_stmt cannot have the same at
the very beginning because calls can still contain
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107478
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
The code which is causing the ICE:
pNewNode->LinkRegisters[cllr_offset] = ((uint32_t)pQList->Head & (0x3FFFUL
<< (2U))) | cllr_mask;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107478
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107478
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||11.2.1
--- Comment #3 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107478
--- Comment #2 from Jacob Abrams ---
I mean to say it similarly reproduces with:
GNU C11 (GNU Toolchain for the Arm Architecture 11.2-2022.02 (arm-11.14))
version 11.2.1 20220111 (arm-none-eabi)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107478
--- Comment #1 from Jacob Abrams ---
Created attachment 53805
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53805=edit
preprocessed file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107478
Bug ID: 107478
Summary: ICE compiling for arm-none-eabi during GIMPLE pass:
dom
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
: verify_gimple failed |[11/12/13 Regression] ICE:
|at -O2 on arm-none-eabi |verify_gimple failed at -O2
||on arm-none-eabi
Known to work||10.1.0, 10.4.0
Ever confirmed|0 |1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106878
Bug ID: 106878
Summary: ICE: verify_gimple failed at -O2 on arm-none-eabi
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106849
Bug ID: 106849
Summary: internal compiler error: tree check: expected none of
template_decl, have template_decl in
do_nonmember_using_decl, at cp/name-lookup.cc:4841
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105090
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105090
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andij.cr at gmail dot com
---
This adjusts the assert guard to include -flto-partition=none which
behaves as WPA.
Bootstrapped & tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, pushed.
PR lto/106334
* dwarf2out.cc (dwarf2out_register_external_die): Adjust
assert.
---
gcc/dwarf2out.cc | 11 ++-
1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105938
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105938
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> I mean backport thereof to 12 branch.
Can you push it?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105938
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I mean backport thereof to 12 branch.
#4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I've verified r13-285-ge7d9fdf5e0 fixes that, both on x86_64 and powerpc64le
when building the nvptx-none offloading compiler.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105938
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
That had a followup fix for nvptx, r13-285-ge7d9fdf5e0ee4c, which wasn't
backported yet it seems?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105938
Matthias Klose changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105938
--- Comment #1 from Matthias Klose ---
$ cat libgcc2.i
int __subvti3_a, __subvti3_b;
void __subvti3() {
int w;
__builtin_sub_overflow(__subvti3_a, __subvti3_b, );
}
$ /home/packages/gcc/12/gcc-12-12.1.0/build-nvptx/gcc/xgcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105938
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
|--- |12.2
Summary|[12 Regression] ICE in |[12/13 Regression] ICE in
|get_insn_temp late, at |get_insn_temp late, at
|final.cc:2050 on nvptx-none |final.cc:2050 on nvptx-none
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105938
Bug ID: 105938
Summary: [12 Regression] ICE in get_insn_temp late, at
final.cc:2050 on nvptx-none
Product: gcc
Version: 12.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105090
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105090
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Earnshaw :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2005b9b888eeac078f2524b1521885f4b5453894
commit r13-1006-g2005b9b888eeac078f2524b1521885f4b5453894
Author: Richard Earnshaw
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105090
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Jeddeloh ---
Hi, I wanted to follow up now that GCC 13 development has opened up. Any news
on including it?
dd the 'cf_check'
> > > function attribute to functions which can be reached by indirect branch.
> > >
> > > Add -fcf-check-attribute=[yes|no|none] to imply "cf_check" or "nocf_check"
> > > function attributes so that GCC can produce a diagnostic when
"legal" forward edges than necessary. -mmanual-endbr
> > provides a way to insert ENDBR instruction at function entry only via
> > the 'cf_check' function attribute and programmers can add the 'cf_check'
> > function attribute to functions which can be reached by indirec
a way to insert ENDBR instruction at function entry only via
> the 'cf_check' function attribute and programmers can add the 'cf_check'
> function attribute to functions which can be reached by indirect branch.
>
> Add -fcf-check-attribute=[yes|no|none] to imply "cf_check" or "
'cf_check' function attribute and programmers can add the 'cf_check'
function attribute to functions which can be reached by indirect branch.
Add -fcf-check-attribute=[yes|no|none] to imply "cf_check" or "nocf_check"
function attributes so that GCC can produce a diagnostic when t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105090
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rearnsha at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96882
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Earnshaw :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1dca4ca1bf2f1b05537a1052e373d8b0ff11e53c
commit r12-7894-g1dca4ca1bf2f1b05537a1052e373d8b0ff11e53c
Author: Richard Earnshaw
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105090
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-03-29
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105090
--- Comment #1 from Richard Earnshaw ---
This was fallout from some changes made internally in the compiler in around
the gcc-10 timeframe, but it really just exposed a more general problem with
the failure to detect opportunities to use
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105090
Bug ID: 105090
Summary: BFI instructions are not generated on
arm-none-eabi-g++
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96882
David Crocker changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dcrocker at eschertech dot com
---
'cf_check' function attribute and programmers can add the 'cf_check'
function attribute to functions which can be reached by indirect branch.
Add -fcf-check-attribute=[yes|no|none] to imply "cf_check" or "nocf_check"
function attributes so that GCC can produce a diagnostic when t
-cmi
(gcm.cache/$srcdir/g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-5_a.H.gcm)
FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-5_a.H -std=c++17 (internal compiler error:
tree check: expected none of template_decl, have template_decl in
add_specializations, at cp/module.cc:12979)
FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-5_a.H -std
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104283
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104283
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tom de Vries :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:decde11183bdccc46587d6614b75f3d56a2f2e4a
commit r12-7098-gdecde11183bdccc46587d6614b75f3d56a2f2e4a
Author: Tom de Vries
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100428
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
: \
Assertion `out[j * 32 + i] == (i + j) * 2' failed.
FAIL: libgomp.oacc-c/../libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/reduction-7.c \
-DACC_DEVICE_TYPE_nvidia=1 -DACC_MEM_SHARED=0 -foffload=nvptx-none \
-O0 execution test
...
During investigation I found ptx code like this:
...
@ %r163 bra
ned Enum(harden_sls) Var(ix86_harden_sls)
Init(harden_sls_none)
+Generate code to mitigate against straight line speculation.
+
+Enum
+Name(harden_sls) Type(enum harden_sls)
+Known choices for mitigation against straight line speculation with
-mharden-sls=:
+
+EnumValue
+Enum(harden_sls) String
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104283
Bug ID: 104283
Summary: nvptx-none needs more user friendly architecture
handling
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104129
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104129
Bug ID: 104129
Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr57147-2.c -O2 -flto
-fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none (test for
excess errors)
Product: gcc
Version
-5_a.H module-cmi
(gcm.cache/$srcdir/g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-5_a.H.gcm)
FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-5_a.H -std=c++17 (internal compiler error:
tree check: expected none of template_decl, have template_decl in
add_specializations, at cp/module.cc:12969)
FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme
||rejects-valid
Summary|compiler rejects import,|[F18] compiler rejects
|{none,all,only}, does not |import, {none,all,only},
|recognize the keyword |does not recognize
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103757
--- Comment #1 from Bastiaan Braams ---
Correction, it should say "import, only : wp" (single colon). Same error
message.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103757
Bug ID: 103757
Summary: compiler rejects import, {none,all,only}, does not
recognize the keyword
Product: gcc
Version: 10.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
/modules/xtreme-header-5_a.H -std=c++17 (internal compiler error:
tree check: expected none of template_decl, have template_decl in
add_specializations, at cp/module.cc:12968)
FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-5_a.H -std=c++17 (test for excess errors)
FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-5_a.H -std=c++2a
-5_a.H -std=c++17 (internal compiler error:
tree check: expected none of template_decl, have template_decl in
add_specializations, at cp/module.cc:12966)
FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-5_a.H -std=c++17 (test for excess errors)
FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-5_a.H -std=c++2a (internal compiler
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100428
--- Comment #4 from Tom de Vries ---
FTR, reproduces with driver version 470.86 on Quadro M1200 and GeForce GT 1030.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103305
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103305
--- Comment #24 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tamar Christina :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ba6bb287f03d42ab6c4f39ce99dcf94ec5113655
commit r12-5819-gba6bb287f03d42ab6c4f39ce99dcf94ec5113655
Author: Tamar Christina
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103305
--- Comment #23 from Jonathan Wakely ---
We should revert it. Could you do that (after checking the reverted libstdc++
code works with the latest newlib code) please?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103305
--- Comment #22 from Tamar Christina ---
Ok, great, Jonathan what do you want to do, do we need to revert the commit or
just close this?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103305
--- Comment #21 from Richard Earnshaw ---
The newlib change that caused this has now been reverted:
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/newlib/2021/018747.html
to make it possible
to detect past-the-end accesses in calls to functions that
only take a pointer (and not a size).
This logic has proved to be overly restrictive for the "none"
access mode applied to void* pointer arguments as a signal
that a function doesn't access the object. Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103305
--- Comment #20 from Tamar Christina ---
Newlib ML thread https://sourceware.org/pipermail/newlib/2021/018706.html
to functions that
only take a pointer (and not a size).
This logic has proved to be overly restrictive for the "none"
access mode applied to void* pointer arguments as a signal
that a function doesn't access the object. The use case that
brought this to light is a function that only stores i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103305
--- Comment #19 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #17)
> If the newlib change is still desirable, it would be nice if it was
> conditional on the __GNUC__ version, so old versions of GCC can still be
> built.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103305
--- Comment #18 from Jonathan Wakely ---
--- a/sim/mips/interp.c
+++ b/sim/mips/interp.c
@@ -1472,14 +1472,14 @@ sim_monitor (SIM_DESC sd,
sim_io_printf(sd,"");
else
{
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103305
--- Comment #17 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The sim code should be fixed, period. It currently has undefined behaviour.
If the newlib change is still desirable, it would be nice if it was conditional
on the __GNUC__ version, so old versions of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103305
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vapier at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103305
--- Comment #15 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Thanks for the explanation! If you have other suggestions to make things less
wrong they'll be welcome.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103305
Pekka S changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||p...@gcc-bugzilla.mail.kaps
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103305
--- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Yes, I think so, otherwise you can only use GCC trunk with the latest newlib.
Maybe give it a week to see if anybody notices problems with the new code, then
backport. Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103305
--- Comment #12 from Tamar Christina ---
Fixed on master, is this something we'd want to backport to active branches?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103305
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tamar Christina :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0e510ab53414430e93c6f5b64841e2f40031cda7
commit r12-5396-g0e510ab53414430e93c6f5b64841e2f40031cda7
Author: Tamar Christina
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103305
--- Comment #10 from Tamar Christina ---
Oh yes, sorry, I kept saying the wrong name :)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103305
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Assuming you mean me, I can't test it easily so please go ahead and push it
yourself. I hereby approve it for trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103305
--- Comment #8 from Tamar Christina ---
This seems to work, would you like me to submit the patch or will you do it
Jakup?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103305
--- Comment #7 from Tamar Christina ---
Thanks Jakub! I'll apply the changes and do a regtest.
c: Likewise.
>
> OK, with a small nit below.
>
> Thanks,
> Uros.
>
> +mharden-sls=
> +Target RejectNegative Joined Enum(harden_sls) Var(ix86_harden_sls)
> Init(harden_sls_none)
> +Generate code to mitigate against straight line speculation.
> +
> +Enum
>
i386/harden-sls-4.c: Likewise.
> > > * gcc.target/i386/harden-sls-5.c: Likewise.
OK, with a small nit below.
Thanks,
Uros.
+mharden-sls=
+Target RejectNegative Joined Enum(harden_sls) Var(ix86_harden_sls)
Init(harden_sls_none)
+Generate code to mitigate against straight line speculation.
+
needed. */
> > @@ -16277,10 +16281,10 @@ ix86_output_function_return (bool long_p)
> >return "";
> > }
> >
> > - if (!long_p)
> > -return "%!ret";
> > -
> > - return "rep%; ret";
> > + if (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103305
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #5)
> static const mask blank= space;
We might want to use blank = _ISspace | _ISblank for this last one, but I don't
really understand what newlib
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103305
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This should work:
--- a/libstdc++-v3/config/os/newlib/ctype_base.h
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/config/os/newlib/ctype_base.h
@@ -41,6 +41,7 @@ _GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_VERSION
// NB: Offsets into
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103305
--- Comment #4 from Tamar Christina ---
Looks like that commit moved the short named to ctype_.h instead of ctype.h.
I'm however unsure if this is something GCC needs to adapt to or if newlib
needs to fix this. They claim it now matches
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103305
--- Comment #3 from Tamar Christina ---
logs indicate that this started happening between
3ba1bd0d9dbc..2ec453b566ac on Nov 12. However that range contains a suspicious
newlib commit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103305
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||redi at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103305
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|aarch64-none-elf|aarch64-none-elf, bfin-elf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103305
Bug ID: 103305
Summary: [12 Regression] Cannot build aarch64-none-elf
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: build, wrong-code
Severity: normal
return "int3";
> + }
>return "";
> }
>
> diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.opt b/gcc/config/i386/i386.opt
> index 46fad3cc038..8d499a5a4df 100644
> --- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.opt
> +++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386.opt
>
p; harden_sls_return))
> > > > +return "%!ret\n\tint3";
> > > > + else
> > > > +{
> > > > + if (!long_p)
> > > > + return "%!ret";
> > > >
> > > > - return
Joined Enum(harden_sls) Var(ix86_harden_sls)
Init(harden_sls_none)
+Generate code to mitigate against straight line speculation.
+
+Enum
+Name(harden_sls) Type(enum harden_sls)
+Known choices for mitigation against straight line speculation with
-mharden-sls=:
+
+EnumValue
+Enum(ha
> Also here.
>
> But fputs doesn't know "%!".
>
> >
> > >
> > > /* Output indirect function return. RET_OP is the function return
> > > @@ -16381,7 +16394,12 @@ ix86_output_call_insn (rtx_insn *insn, rtx
> > > call_op)
> > >if (ou
94,12 @@ ix86_output_call_insn (rtx_insn *insn, rtx call_op)
> >if (output_indirect_p && !direct_p)
> > ix86_output_indirect_branch (call_op, xasm, true);
> >else
> > - output_asm_insn (xasm, _op);
> > + {
> > +
> + }
>return "";
> }
>
> diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.opt b/gcc/config/i386/i386.opt
> index b38ac13fc91..c5452c49597 100644
> --- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.opt
> +++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386.opt
> @@ -1121,6 +1121,26 @@ mrecord-retur
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103289
Bug ID: 103289
Summary: OpenMP: Private Allocatable arrays not allowed inside
'parallel' with default(none)
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
record-return
Target Var(ix86_flag_record_return) Init(0)
Generate a __return_loc section pointing to all return instrumentation code.
+mharden-sls=
+Target RejectNegative Joined Enum(harden_sls) Var(ix86_harden_sls)
Init(harden_sls_none)
+Generate code to mitigate against straight line speculat
Reutner-Fischer
Date: Sun Oct 31 17:44:45 2021 +0100
Fortran: Missing error with IMPLICIT none (external) [PR100972]
gcc/fortran/ChangeLog:
PR fortran/100972
* decl.c (gfc_match_implicit_none): Fix typo in warning.
* resolve.c (resolve_unknown_f
Le 31/10/2021 à 18:25, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer via Fortran a écrit :
As Gerhard Steinmetz noticed, gfc_match_implicit_none() had a notify_std
that mentioned IMPORT instead of IMPLICIT. Fix that typo.
IMPLICIT NONE (external) is supposed to require external procedures to
be explicitly declared
201 - 300 of 1580 matches
Mail list logo
