http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57249
Bug ID: 57249
Summary: Unrolling too late for inlining
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52239
--- Comment #17 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Hello,
the Keywords field auto-completes when editing an existing bug, but not in
the form to create a new bug. I seem to remember that it used to work...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57180
--- Comment #3 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se ---
According to
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.8.0/gcc/Zero-Length.html#Zero-Length,
arrays of structures with trailing flex arrays are invalid and rejected. The
page also gives an
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52239
--- Comment #18 from Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #17)
the Keywords field auto-completes when editing an existing bug, but not in
the form to create a new bug. I seem to remember that it
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57236
--- Comment #5 from petschy at gmail dot com ---
I spotted a minor size inefficiency in the code:
0x00400720 +32:jle0x4007c5 _Z6write2R6Streamj+197
0x00400726 +38:mov%rdx,%rsi
0x00400729 +41:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52239
--- Comment #19 from Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #17)
the Keywords field auto-completes when editing an existing bug, but not in
the form to create a new bug. I seem to remember that it
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57250
Bug ID: 57250
Summary: [C++11] std::shared_ptr misses atomic_* support
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57239
Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57239
--- Comment #2 from etherice scottbaldwin at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Daniel Krügler from comment #1)
The report misses a complete example. The following is a reduced form and
free of library stuff:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55278
Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2013-03-23 00:00:00 |2013-05-11
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51591
--- Comment #4 from Bud Davis bdavis at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Upon closer reflection, the underlying problems is the OpenMP threads doing I/O
while the units are being closed.
So, stop shows in the output, followed by output from threads whose units
-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: antoine.balestrat at gmail dot com
Hello !
Using GCC 4.9.0 as of 20130511 :
$ cat optab.c
short a, b;
int f()
{
long long i = 2;
a ? f() ? : 0 : b--;
b = i *= a |= 0;
}
$ xgcc -O2 -ftracer -m32 optab.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57250
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57252
Bug ID: 57252
Summary: GCC does not treat ref-qualified overload set as
ambiguous
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39440
David gccbugzilla at limegreensocks dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57253
Bug ID: 57253
Summary: GCC ignores ref-qualifiers of pseudo-function types in
explicit specializations
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57232
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||rx-elf
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57254
Bug ID: 57254
Summary: Overload resolution failure when member function
tempate is defined out-of-line
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
18 matches
Mail list logo
