[Bug fortran/59411] Problem with TYPE(C_PTR) constant initialization

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59411 --- Comment #4 from mrestelli --- (In reply to janus from comment #1) > (In reply to mrestelli from comment #0) > > > > type(c_ptr), parameter :: p2 = pp > >1 > > Error: non-constant initialization expression at (

[Bug lto/58251] -flto causes ICE lto1: internal compiler error: in splice_child_die, at dwarf2out.c:4706

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58251 --- Comment #13 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- Created attachment 31401 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31401&action=edit Further reduced Further reduced.

[Bug lto/58251] -flto causes ICE lto1: internal compiler error: in splice_child_die, at dwarf2out.c:4706

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58251 --- Comment #14 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- (In reply to David Kredba from comment #11) > Delta died after more than 20 iterations. Started new delta. A little > more reduced ii file uploaded. Boost testcases are always fun ;-) For testcase

[Bug c++/59426] New: __has_trivial_{copy/assign} behavior differs from documentation

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59426 Bug ID: 59426 Summary: __has_trivial_{copy/assign} behavior differs from documentation Product: gcc Version: 4.8.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug middle-end/59409] [4.9 Regression] 253.perlbmk in SPEC CPU 2K is miscompiled

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59409 --- Comment #20 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Mon, 9 Dec 2013, hjl.tools at gmail dot com wrote: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59409 > > H.J. Lu changed: > >What|Removed |Added > -

[Bug c++/58074] [C++11] __is_trivial intrinsic fails for deleted members and for non-trivial copy-c'tors

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58074 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/52707] [C++11] Deleted special member function prevent type being an aggregate

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52707 --- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini --- This is fixed in mainline. I'm adding the testcase and closing the bug.

[Bug c++/52707] [C++11] Deleted special member function prevent type being an aggregate

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52707 --- Comment #3 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: paolo Date: Mon Dec 9 09:50:51 2013 New Revision: 205801 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=205801&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2013-12-09 Paolo Carlini PR c++/52707 * g++.dg/cpp0x/

[Bug c++/52707] [C++11] Deleted special member function prevent type being an aggregate

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52707 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/59411] Problem with TYPE(C_PTR) constant initialization

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59411 --- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to mrestelli from comment #4) > type(t), parameter :: pp = suitable_initialization_expr_for_type_t > type(t), parameter :: p2 = pp > > I would assume that, provided the first assignment is

[Bug libfortran/35667] HP-UX 10 has broken strtod

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35667 Francois-Xavier Coudert changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |WAITING Known to fail|

[Bug libfortran/47716] libgfortran quadmath_weak.h not found on NetBSD 5.1

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47716 Francois-Xavier Coudert changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug tree-optimization/56787] [4.8 Regression] Vectorization fails because of CLOBBER statements

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56787 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW Target Milestone|4.8.3

[Bug testsuite/59043] [4.9 Regression] FAIL: (gcc|++).dg/pubtypes* scan-assembler long.*Length of Public Type Names Info

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59043 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/59427] New: Opening with ios::in | ios::app does not allow appending

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59427 Bug ID: 59427 Summary: Opening with ios::in | ios::app does not allow appending Product: gcc Version: 4.8.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priori

[Bug fortran/58916] Allocation of scalar with array source not rejected

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58916 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code

[Bug fortran/59428] New: [4.9 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_4.f90 -O (test for excess errors) after r205791

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59428 Bug ID: 59428 Summary: [4.9 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_4.f90 -O (test for excess errors) after r205791 Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0

[Bug c/59424] Optimization issue on min/max

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59424 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #

[Bug fortran/58916] Allocation of scalar with array source not rejected

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58916 --- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- The following is sufficient to reject comment 1, but does not reject comment 0: Index: gcc/fortran/resolve.c === --- gcc/fortran/resol

[Bug fortran/58916] Allocation of scalar with array source not rejected

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58916 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|una

[Bug rtl-optimization/59429] New: Missed optimization opportunity in qsort-style comparison functions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59429 Bug ID: 59429 Summary: Missed optimization opportunity in qsort-style comparison functions Product: gcc Version: 4.8.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: minor

[Bug c++/59426] __has_trivial_{copy/assign} behavior differs from documentation

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59426 --- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini --- The documentation definitely needs updating. The builtins track the C++11 semantics.

[Bug tree-optimization/54779] split FRAME variables back into pieces

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54779 --- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor --- Created attachment 31402 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31402&action=edit Patch detaching arrays away from aggregates Eric, to what extent would this patch suffice? It detects situations

[Bug fortran/58916] [F03] Allocation of scalar with array source not rejected

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58916 --- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to janus from comment #3) > This updated patch rejects both test cases ... and regtests cleanly (except for the current failure of PR 59428).

[Bug middle-end/59409] [4.9 Regression] 253.perlbmk in SPEC CPU 2K is miscompiled

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59409 --- Comment #21 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #20) > > --- Comment #19 from H.J. Lu --- > > Adding -fno-strict-aliasing fixed the problem. > > If using Perl_my_bcopy is the problem then maybe defining I can give i

[Bug sanitizer/59410] tsan tests fail with address randomization disabled

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59410 --- Comment #31 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #29) > It is not that easy. gold before February 2013 doesn't grok -Ttext-segment, > you need -Ttext there instead. See > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-02/msg00777

[Bug sanitizer/59415] ICE segfault in verify_bb_vtables for g++ -S -fvtable-verify=std -fsanitize=null

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59415 --- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek --- Reduced: void foo (void) { throw 0; } I have a fix.

[Bug fortran/59428] [4.9 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_4.f90 -O (test for excess errors) after r205791

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59428 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/59409] [4.9 Regression] 253.perlbmk in SPEC CPU 2K is miscompiled

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59409 --- Comment #22 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #21) > > > HAS_SAFE_BCOPY will fix it? > No, it doesn't work.

[Bug sanitizer/59009] libsanitizer merge from upstream r191666 breaks bootstrap on powerpc64-linux

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59009 --- Comment #24 from Kostya Serebryany --- > sanitizer_platform_limits_posix.cc:763:39: error: 'EOWNERDEAD' was not We see this bug ourselves, the fix is under review upstream.

[Bug sanitizer/59009] libsanitizer merge from upstream r191666 breaks bootstrap on powerpc64-linux

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59009 --- Comment #25 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > > sanitizer_platform_limits_posix.cc:763:39: error: 'EOWNERDEAD' was not > > We see this bug ourselves, the fix is under review upstream. Would it be possible to post the fix? TIA.

[Bug fortran/59428] [4.9 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_4.f90 -O (test for excess errors) after r205791

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59428 --- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > I will commit the following as obvious to fix it: ... This doesn't fix the unfriendly error message.

[Bug rtl-optimization/59429] Missed optimization opportunity in qsort-style comparison functions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59429 --- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu --- gold has --icf [none,all,safe] Identical Code Folding. '--icf=safe' Folds ctors, dtors and functions whose pointers are definitely not taken. which should help it at link-time.

[Bug libstdc++/59427] Opening with ios::in | ios::app does not allow appending

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59427 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug sanitizer/59009] libsanitizer merge from upstream r191666 breaks bootstrap on powerpc64-linux

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59009 --- Comment #26 from Kostya Serebryany --- > Would it be possible to post the fix? TIA. Committed upstream as http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=196779&view=rev Feel free to commit the exact same change to gcc or wait for the next merge (will

[Bug fortran/59398] Wrong bounds for allocatable result and for

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59398 --- Comment #5 from Sergio Losilla --- (In reply to Harald Anlauf from comment #3) OK, so we seem to agree that gfortran is not assigning the correct bounds, right? > shape(-3:3) == shape (-2:4) == shape(1:7) > > Shape is UBOUND-LBOUND+1. Hm,

[Bug rtl-optimization/59429] Missed optimization opportunity in qsort-style comparison functions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59429 --- Comment #2 from Jan Engelhardt --- Suppose all functions are used and taken.

[Bug rtl-optimization/59429] Missed optimization opportunity in qsort-style comparison functions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59429 --- Comment #3 from Jan Engelhardt --- I took it "Component: rtl-optimization" meant Register Transfer Language, not Runtime Linking. If needed, please reassign to whatever component is actually applicable. I am looking for a compiler enhancement

[Bug fortran/59428] [4.9 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_4.f90 -O (test for excess errors) after r205791

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59428 --- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #2) > > I will commit the following as obvious to fix it: ... > > This doesn't fix the unfriendly error message. Yes, but there is another PR for this

[Bug tree-optimization/54779] split FRAME variables back into pieces

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54779 --- Comment #5 from Eric Botcazou --- > Eric, to what extent would this patch suffice? It detects situations > when an array is the only thing preventing a local scalar from being > totally replaced disappearing and if it also complies with a num

[Bug fortran/39695] [F03] ProcPtr function results: wrong name in error message

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39695 --- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Another example: proc_ptr_result_4.f90 in the testsuite yields the following error since 4.9 (see also PR59428): procedure(sin), pointer :: f 1 Error: Procedure p

[Bug fortran/39695] [F03] ProcPtr function results: wrong name in error message

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39695 --- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- As noted by Dominique in comment 2: Comment 1 is fixed since 4.8, and out of the three cases in comment 0 only the second one persists (together with comment 3).

[Bug sanitizer/59415] ICE segfault in verify_bb_vtables for g++ -S -fvtable-verify=std -fsanitize=null

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59415 --- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek --- Author: mpolacek Date: Mon Dec 9 14:44:03 2013 New Revision: 205805 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=205805&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR sanitizer/59415 * vtable-verify.c (verify_bb_vtables): Check t

[Bug sanitizer/59415] ICE segfault in verify_bb_vtables for g++ -S -fvtable-verify=std -fsanitize=null

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59415 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/59424] Optimization issue on min/max

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59424 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #1) > I can observe the same behavior with trunk. > > For func2, we compute a < b ? a : b first and then call sqrtf on that, while > for func3 we have return a < b ? A

[Bug rtl-optimization/54300] [4.7, 4.8 Regression] regcprop incorrectly looks through parallel register swap operation

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54300 --- Comment #15 from Richard Earnshaw --- Author: rearnsha Date: Mon Dec 9 14:54:00 2013 New Revision: 205807 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=205807&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR rtl-optimization/54300 gcc/ PR rtl-optimization/54300

[Bug lto/58251] [4.7/4.8 Regression] -flto causes ICE lto1: internal compiler error: in splice_child_die, at dwarf2out.c:4706

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58251 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW Known to work|

[Bug tree-optimization/48641] [4.7 Regression] ICE: verify_flow_info failed: Wrong frequency of block 77 -419530 with -O -fno-tree-ccp -fno-tree-copy-prop

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48641 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #7

[Bug tree-optimization/59417] [4.9 Regression] ICE in determine_value_range, at tree-ssa-loop-niter.c:176

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59417 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 Target Milestone|---

[Bug middle-end/38474] compile time explosion in dataflow_set_preserve_mem_locs at -O3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38474 --- Comment #77 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Mon Dec 9 15:13:07 2013 New Revision: 205808 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=205808&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2013-12-09 Richard Biener PR middle-end/38474 * tree-ssa-str

[Bug go/59408] [4.9 regression] Many Go tests FAIL with notesleep not on g0

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59408 --- Comment #3 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- > --- Comment #2 from Ian Lance Taylor --- > This problem should be fixed now. Sorry about that. It does for the vast majority of the 32-bit tests. I'll file separate bugs for the few

[Bug go/59430] New: [4.9 regression] os/user FAILs on Solaris

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59430 Bug ID: 59430 Summary: [4.9 regression] os/user FAILs on Solaris Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: go

[Bug go/59430] [4.9 regression] os/user FAILs on Solaris

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59430 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0

[Bug go/59431] New: [4.9 regression] runtime FAILs on Solaris

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59431 Bug ID: 59431 Summary: [4.9 regression] runtime FAILs on Solaris Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: go

[Bug go/59431] [4.9 regression] runtime FAILs on Solaris

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59431 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0

[Bug go/59432] New: [4.9 regression] sync/atomic FAILs on Solaris/x86

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59432 Bug ID: 59432 Summary: [4.9 regression] sync/atomic FAILs on Solaris/x86 Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug go/59432] [4.9 regression] sync/atomic FAILs on Solaris/x86

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59432 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0

[Bug go/59433] New: [4.9 regression] Many 64-bit Go tests SEGV on Solaris

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59433 Bug ID: 59433 Summary: [4.9 regression] Many 64-bit Go tests SEGV on Solaris Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compone

[Bug go/59433] [4.9 regression] Many 64-bit Go tests SEGV on Solaris

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59433 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0

[Bug libstdc++/59434] New: move_iterator is broken for input iterators with an rvalue as reference type

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59434 Bug ID: 59434 Summary: move_iterator is broken for input iterators with an rvalue as reference type Product: gcc Version: 4.8.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: maj

[Bug fortran/58916] [F03] Allocation of scalar with array source not rejected

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58916 --- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to janus from comment #1) > Here is a variant without classes: > > real, allocatable :: a > real b(1) > allocate(a, source=b) > end I just noticed that this case has been filed as PR 5

[Bug fortran/58916] [F03] Allocation of scalar with array source not rejected

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58916 --- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- *** Bug 58917 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug fortran/58917] ICE with allocation of a scalar with array source

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58917 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug fortran/58916] [F03] Allocation of scalar with array source not rejected

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58916 --- Comment #7 from Vladimir Fuka --- Sorry, didn't remember that.

[Bug c/56573] GCC generates non-optimal transactional code when inlining nested transaction.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56573 Aldy Hernandez changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug c/56572] GCC generates non-optimal transactional code when inlining nested transaction.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56572 --- Comment #2 from Aldy Hernandez --- *** Bug 56573 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug tree-optimization/59417] [4.9 Regression] ICE in determine_value_range, at tree-ssa-loop-niter.c:176

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59417 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- The problem is the uninitialized var t in the testcase, with it apparently the range info weird and inconsistent, but what sanity can one expect from uninitialized value, any use of it is invalid. Before *.co

[Bug c++/59435] New: sizeof...(T) as default value for an argument does not work

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59435 Bug ID: 59435 Summary: sizeof...(T) as default value for an argument does not work Product: gcc Version: 4.8.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Pri

[Bug libstdc++/59434] move_iterator is broken for input iterators with an rvalue as reference type

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59434 --- Comment #1 from cheparukhin at yandex dot ru --- I've found out that this is not a bug in the implementation but an issue in the standard itself: http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-active.html#2106

[Bug c/59424] Optimization issue on min/max

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59424 --- Comment #3 from Jean-Marc Valin --- What's strange is that adding -ffast-math makes gcc use maxss on func3() too, even though it was already allowed to without -ffast-math. I had the same problem with absolute value, although in that case fabs

[Bug tree-optimization/56572] GCC generates non-optimal transactional code when inlining nested transaction.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56572 Aldy Hernandez changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug go/59432] [4.9 regression] sync/atomic FAILs on Solaris/x86

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59432 --- Comment #1 from Ian Lance Taylor --- FYI, the point of the test is to get that segmentation violation and ensure that the signal handler generates a runtime panic as it should. The actual problem is presumably happening some time later.

[Bug sanitizer/59009] libsanitizer merge from upstream r191666 breaks bootstrap on powerpc64-linux

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59009 --- Comment #27 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > > Would it be possible to post the fix? TIA. > Committed upstream as http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=196779&view=rev > Feel free to commit the exact same change to gcc > or wait for the next

[Bug libstdc++/59392] crash on throw from "unexpected exception" handler with ARM EABI unwinder

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59392 --- Comment #2 from roland at gnu dot org --- Fix posted: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-12/msg00753.html

[Bug libstdc++/59434] [lwg/2106] move_iterator is broken for input iterators with an rvalue as reference type

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59434 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |SUSPENDED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug lto/58251] [4.7/4.8 Regression] -flto causes ICE lto1: internal compiler error: in splice_child_die, at dwarf2out.c:4706

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58251 --- Comment #16 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #15) > Confirmed with 4.7.3 and 4.8.2. Seems to work on the trunk, worked with > 4.6.4. > > Now it would be interesting to bisect what fixed this on the trunk

[Bug libstdc++/59436] New: FAIL: 17_intro/headers/c++200x/stdc++.cc (test for excess errors)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59436 Bug ID: 59436 Summary: FAIL: 17_intro/headers/c++200x/stdc++.cc (test for excess errors) Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libstdc++/59436] FAIL: 17_intro/headers/c++200x/stdc++.cc (test for excess errors)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59436 --- Comment #1 from Uroš Bizjak --- On a related note, without -std=gnu++0x: $ /ssd/uros/gcc-build/gcc/cc1plus -g -O2 -fpreprocessed -quiet stdc++.ii In file included from /ssd/uros/gcc-build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/st

[Bug libstdc++/59436] FAIL: 17_intro/headers/c++200x/stdc++.cc (test for excess errors)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59436 --- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak --- (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #0) > Created attachment 31403 [details] > Preprocessed source > > Attached testcase randomly fails to compile. Following valgrind error was > obtained on x86_64-pc-linux-g

[Bug fortran/58880] [OOP] ICE on valid with FINAL function and type extension

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58880 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code S

[Bug sanitizer/59437] New: ICE in for g++ -S -fvtable-verify=std -fsanitize=null

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59437 Bug ID: 59437 Summary: ICE in for g++ -S -fvtable-verify=std -fsanitize=null Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: ice-on-valid-code Severity: normal

[Bug sanitizer/59437] ICE in for g++ -S -fvtable-verify=std -fsanitize=null

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59437 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0

[Bug sanitizer/59437] ICE in for g++ -S -fvtable-verify=std -fsanitize=null

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59437 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/58175] [OOP] Incorrect warning message on scalar finalizer

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58175 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[F03] Incorrect warning |[OOP] Incorrect warning

[Bug libstdc++/59436] FAIL: 17_intro/headers/c++200x/stdc++.cc (test for excess errors)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59436 --- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak --- (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #2) > (gdb) p init > $1 = (tree) 0x100139a078 > (gdb) p type > $2 = (tree_node *) 0x101 > (gdb) FAIL: 17_intro/headers/c++200x/stdc++_multiple_inclusion.cc (test for exces

[Bug libstdc++/59436] FAIL: 17_intro/headers/c++200x/stdc++.cc (test for excess errors)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59436 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4 f

[Bug libstdc++/59436] FAIL: 17_intro/headers/c++200x/stdc++.cc (test for excess errors)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59436 Uroš Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||58627 --- Comment #5 from Uroš Bizjak ---

[Bug libstdc++/59436] FAIL: 17_intro/headers/c++200x/stdc++.cc (test for excess errors)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59436 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/58627] [4.9 Regression] crash during compilation of boost testsuite

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58627 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ubizjak at gmail dot com --- Comment #5 f

[Bug c++/59435] sizeof...(T) as default value for an argument in the constructor does not work

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59435 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug lto/58251] [4.7/4.8 Regression] -flto causes ICE lto1: internal compiler error: in splice_child_die, at dwarf2out.c:4706

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58251 --- Comment #17 from David Kredba --- Thank you! Looks like they are not overweighting it at the Creduce web site, it is way better then delta. Delta for me ended already 10 times with message that: "Could not increase granularity; we are done."

[Bug fortran/59438] New: DWARF: Fortran mishandles ALLOCATABLE/ASSOCIATED in debug output

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59438 Bug ID: 59438 Summary: DWARF: Fortran mishandles ALLOCATABLE/ASSOCIATED in debug output Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: wrong-code

[Bug libfortran/35667] HP-UX 10 has broken strtod

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35667 --- Comment #9 from dave.anglin at bell dot net --- On 12/9/2013 5:01 AM, fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > Was that fixed with John's commit? I think so. I believe this was left open because the patch wasn't back ported. I could confirm but

[Bug fortran/59428] [4.9 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/proc_ptr_result_4.f90 -O (test for excess errors) after r205791

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59428 --- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres --- Beware of a TAB in +real, intent(in) :: x (comment 2).

[Bug c++/59426] __has_trivial_{copy/assign} behavior differs from documentation

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59426 Richard Smith changed: What|Removed |Added CC||richard-gccbugzilla@metafoo

[Bug libstdc++/59421] stof(), stod() wrong result

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59421 --- Comment #3 from Stefan Helmert --- OK, please try this code: https://github.com/TheTesla/DigiKeyCSV2KiCadSCHpatcher/tree/gcctest The relevant function is norm_value().

[Bug libstdc++/59439] New: std::locale uses atomic instructions on construction

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59439 Bug ID: 59439 Summary: std::locale uses atomic instructions on construction Product: gcc Version: 4.8.3 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Componen

[Bug libstdc++/59439] std::locale uses atomic instructions on construction

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59439 --- Comment #1 from Ben Maurer --- Facebook is putting a $50 bounty on this bug via bountysource: https://www.bountysource.com/issues/1350875

[Bug fortran/59438] DWARF: Fortran mishandles ALLOCATABLE/ASSOCIATED in debug output

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59438 --- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus --- Regarding (a): I think we should consider to simply use the same structure of arrays ("struct array_descr_info") also for scalars. Besides that it already exists, it is probably also sensible when we will hand

[Bug sanitizer/59437] ICE in for g++ -S -fvtable-verify=std -fsanitize=null

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59437 --- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek --- Slightly reduced: template < typename T > struct A { T foo (); }; template < typename T > struct C: virtual public A < T > { C & operator<< (C & (C &)); }; template < typename T > C < T > &endl (C < int >

  1   2   >