https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66647
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65375
kugan at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66549
Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66306
--- Comment #2 from Andreas Krebbel krebbel at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: krebbel
Date: Wed Jun 24 06:50:53 2015
New Revision: 224875
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224875root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR66306: Fix match_dups on swapped operands.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66647
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66647
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63408
--- Comment #13 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ramana
Date: Wed Jun 24 08:28:08 2015
New Revision: 224879
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224879root=gccview=rev
Log:
Fix PR target/63408
The attached patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65811
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65919
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66647
--- Comment #4 from Allan McRae allan at archlinux dot org ---
Created attachment 35839
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35839action=edit
Unreduced testcase
Unreduced testcase attached.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66639
--- Comment #3 from Simon Gleissner simon at gleissner dot de ---
Hi *
If at all, this could only be provided as compiler extension.
Good point. Yes, i think this would be a adequate solution.
(assuming making it constexpr doesn't break
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65811
--- Comment #5 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Wed Jun 24 09:21:45 2015
New Revision: 224888
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224888root=gccview=rev
Log:
/cp
2015-06-24 Paolo Carlini
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66647
Bug ID: 66647
Summary: [5/6 regression] ICE: in instantiate_class_template_1,
at cp/pt.c:9254
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66647
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65375
--- Comment #11 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jim Wilson from comment #10)
Improved, but not completely resolved. We still get unnecessary orr
instructions, same as in comment 2. This is partly an issue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65919
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|drew.dormann at gmail dot com |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30044
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66549
--- Comment #6 from Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: mikael
Date: Wed Jun 24 09:16:13 2015
New Revision: 224887
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224887root=gccview=rev
Log:
Fix openmp global state fortran regression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66633
Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE on valid verify_gimple |[5/6 regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66646
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65979
--- Comment #36 from Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
It seems the tstsi peephole is still wrong. While working on AMS the following
example:
int test (char* x, char* y, int z)
{
return ((x[2] x[3]) == 0) + z;
}
silently produced
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66633
Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66638
Igor Zamyatin izamyatin at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30044
--- Comment #6 from Patrick Palka ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Wed Jun 24 12:10:57 2015
New Revision: 224896
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224896root=gccview=rev
Log:
Revert fix for PR c++/30044
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66648
Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66611
Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66648
Bug ID: 66648
Summary: [4.9/5/6 regression] incorrect memcpy expansion with
unrolled_loop strategy at -O2
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66648
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30044
Patrick Palka ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66200
--- Comment #8 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ramana
Date: Wed Jun 24 09:59:28 2015
New Revision: 224890
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224890root=gccview=rev
Log:
Fix PR target/66200
This applies the same
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66647
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66657
Bug ID: 66657
Summary: Feature request - assembly output from lto compiler
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59833
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66563
--- Comment #34 from Kazumoto Kojima kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kkojima
Date: Wed Jun 24 22:11:04 2015
New Revision: 224925
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224925root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR target/66563
* [SH] Add a new operand to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66528
--- Comment #6 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: manu
Date: Wed Jun 24 22:16:42 2015
New Revision: 224926
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224926root=gccview=rev
Log:
The problem is that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66659
Bug ID: 66659
Summary: Accepts invalid when undeduced context encountered
deducing from a trailing parameter pack
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66657
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ---
What are you trying to do with the assembly after the fact?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66605
--- Comment #10 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #9)
I still think this is a latent bug in the way that Fortran is generating the
PARAM_DECL for time, but if the Fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58133
--- Comment #5 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Oh and Kyrylo fixed up vfp.md last year too. So it's only ARM state that
remains. I have a few patches in flight that I'm testing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48956
--- Comment #16 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Matt Kline from comment #15)
Fixed for GCC 6.
May I ask why this is being deferred until GCC 6.x? I'll readily admit that
I'm not well-versed in the GCC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65919
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66605
--- Comment #9 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #8)
If so, then the ICE was not caused by my diagnostic changes, it just
exposes a
problem that has been latent or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66657
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ---
There should be a gcc command line option to generate the assembly language
output of the lto compiler.
Use -save-temps.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58133
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64172
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48956
Matt Kline matt at bitbashing dot io changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||matt at bitbashing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66528
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66563
--- Comment #35 from Kazumoto Kojima kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #33)
I see, thanks. In this case, could you please add a comment e.g.:
;; Loads of the GOTPC relocation values must not be optimized away
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66647
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Jun 24 20:23:53 2015
New Revision: 224921
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224921root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR c++/66647
* pt.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65919
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Jun 24 20:24:01 2015
New Revision: 224922
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224922root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR c++/65919
* mangle.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66656
Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66654
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66658
Bug ID: 66658
Summary: missing -Wunused-value negating a function result in a
comma expression
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65358
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48956
--- Comment #17 from Matt Kline matt at bitbashing dot io ---
Thanks for the info and such a quick response! I'll see if I can do the
required legwork.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66642
--- Comment #2 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 35842
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35842action=edit
[1/2] Tentative patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66642
--- Comment #3 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 35843
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35843action=edit
[2/2] Tentative patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66649
Bug ID: 66649
Summary: variable template specializations not being found
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66651
Bug ID: 66651
Summary: altivec.h + c++11 r
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: blocker
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66639
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|5.1.1 |6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66650
Bug ID: 66650
Summary: libgfortran: warning: left shift of negative value
[-Wshift-negative-value]
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65979
--- Comment #37 from Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #36)
It seems the tstsi peephole is still wrong. While working on AMS the
following example:
int test (char* x, char* y, int z)
{
return
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66563
--- Comment #33 from Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #32)
I see, thanks. In this case, could you please add a comment e.g.:
;; Loads of the GOTPC relocation values must not be optimized away
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43722
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65771
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49799
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48803
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65664
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=0
Bug ID: 0
Summary: [ia64] Speculative load not checked before use,
leading to a NaT Consumption Vector interruption
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65979
--- Comment #38 from Kazumoto Kojima kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #37)
Kaz, could you please add this to your test runs? For me it's a bit
difficult to do proper testing at the moment.
I'm testing the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66658
--- Comment #1 from Martin Sebor msebor at gcc dot gnu.org ---
See also pr64639 (which this bug may be a duplicate of).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45447
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49437
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1
--- Comment #4 from Pádraig Brady P at draigBrady dot com ---
I should note that I worked around the issue by increasing the allocation for
the structure on the heap up to a multiple of alignof(the_struct). See:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1
--- Comment #7 from Pádraig Brady P at draigBrady dot com ---
Created attachment 35852
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35852action=edit
reproducer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1
Bug ID: 1
Summary: incorrect memory access in optimization with flexible
array member
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40836
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39585
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48808
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65924
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66653
Aldy Hernandez aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c++ |debug
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1
--- Comment #3 from Pádraig Brady P at draigBrady dot com ---
Created attachment 35851
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35851action=edit
disassembly of forced good mem access
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1
--- Comment #1 from Pádraig Brady P at draigBrady dot com ---
Created attachment 35849
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35849action=edit
summary code (does not reproduce issue)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1
--- Comment #2 from Pádraig Brady P at draigBrady dot com ---
Created attachment 35850
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35850action=edit
disassembly of problematic mem access
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66651
Andreas Schwab sch...@linux-m68k.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66651
timocafe timothee.ewart at epfl dot ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66651
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dje at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65750
--- Comment #7 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Wed Jun 24 15:11:06 2015
New Revision: 224901
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224901root=gccview=rev
Log:
/cp
2015-06-24 Adam Butcher
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66501
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Jun 24 15:41:52 2015
New Revision: 224906
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224906root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR c++/66501
* init.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66501
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Jun 24 15:41:10 2015
New Revision: 224905
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224905root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR c++/66501
* init.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2
Bug ID: 2
Summary: Request: Change #error directive displaying
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66638
--- Comment #2 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
It is an assertion failure, only I had difficualty in reproducing the issue. I
got below link error when doing profiledbootstrap with given configuration
options:
/tmp/cc3NzkDN.ltrans0.ltrans.o:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66412
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I bet the bug is in whatever creates the mode mismatch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66412
--- Comment #6 from Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com ---
Please note that combine already calls propagate_for_debug with wrong i1src:
reakpoint 3, internal_error (gmsgid=gmsgid@entry=0x1622837 in %s, at %s:%d)
at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66650
Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66652
Bug ID: 66652
Summary: try_transform_to_exit_first_loop_alt generates
incorrect loop
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66412
Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66482
Aldy Hernandez aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
1 - 100 of 130 matches
Mail list logo
