https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69289
--- Comment #4 from Paul le roux ---
I compiled gcc/g++ from svn and the slowdown is still present without the
--profile-generate flag. (But both are faster than what they were :D )
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69271
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka ---
The optimization was intentional - dropping the weak bit makes GCC to optimize
the references to symbol better (knowing it won't be NULL because the
definition
is provided). I wonder how this break glibc. What
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68961
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Jan 15 11:49:43 2016
New Revision: 232415
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232415=gcc=rev
Log:
2016-01-15 Richard Biener
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12672
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Ivan Godard from comment #0)
> The problem seems to be that the compiler is not first pruning all
> candidates with the wrong number of formals before doing type matching.
Which is correct.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68961
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69271
--- Comment #5 from nsz at gcc dot gnu.org ---
copy pasting from
http://www.openwall.com/lists/musl/2016/01/13/2
(this is musl libc, but glibc has the same issue)
lto breaks symbol binding for environ, _environ, ___environ.
(they should be weak,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56194
--- Comment #8 from Andreas Krebbel ---
Author: krebbel
Date: Fri Jan 15 12:53:00 2016
New Revision: 232422
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232422=gcc=rev
Log:
S/390: const9.C: Disable test.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
PR c++/56194
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69293
Bug ID: 69293
Summary: scoped_allocator_adaptor::construct calls wrong
function
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68148
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Fri Jan 15 11:00:24 2016
New Revision: 232410
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232410=gcc=rev
Log:
PR ipa/68148
* ipa-icf.c (sem_function::merge): Virtual functions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12672
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
EDG rejects the reduced examples in comments 3 and 4 (the original testcase
doesn't compile any more for other reasons due to the preprocessed library
headers).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68148
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12672
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This seems to be:
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_active.html#1635
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_active.html#2008 might be
related, and seems to agree with GCC.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68586
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
GCC6 uses a cache for evaluated constant expressions:
4019 tree
4020 maybe_constant_value (tree t, tree decl)
4021 {
4022 tree ret = cv_cache.get (t);
The CONST_DECL x is in the cache, associated with 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69170
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Fails in GIMPLE verification because
vect_cst__127 = {_172, _162};
references the released SSA name _172 after BB vectorization.
Not a dup of PR66856.
It looks like we end up building a SLP node from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12672
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2009-04-16 16:42:54 |2016-1-15
--- Comment #8 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69228
--- Comment #4 from afomin at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: afomin
Date: Fri Jan 15 11:03:24 2016
New Revision: 232412
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232412=gcc=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline
2016-01-13 Alexander Fomin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69271
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63890
--- Comment #27 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Certainly adding TARGET_MACHO is Ok by me.
I don't think this is the problem. I have reapplied the patch in comment 12 for
config/i386/darwin.h and
--- ../_clean/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66797
--- Comment #1 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Seems HPPA only supports small int in addressing mode "REG+OFFSET" of floating
mode load/store. In effect, we can only group every two address iv uses,
resulting in 20 iv uses. Even with this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68586
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69291
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |FIXED
--- Comment #3 from Markus
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69294
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68976
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #9 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69296
--- Comment #1 from mrestelli ---
I should also mention that this happens for me with
GNU Fortran (GCC) 6.0.0 20160112 (experimental)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69297
--- Comment #1 from Yuri Rumyantsev ---
Created attachment 37356
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37356=edit
test-case to reproduce
TO reproduce compile with -Ofast -march=core-avx2 options.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69246
--- Comment #11 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Fri Jan 15 14:41:10 2016
New Revision: 232428
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232428=gcc=rev
Log:
PR 69246: Invalid REG_ARGS_SIZE for sibcalls
The problem in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69246
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67515
Yury V. Zaytsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||yury.zaytsev@traveltainment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69245
--- Comment #13 from James Greenhalgh ---
This is a similar case I reduced from the Ubuntu rebuild failures, hitting the
"max" idiom recognition:
---
#pragma GCC push_options
#pragma GCC target("fpu=crypto-neon-fp-armv8")
static void
foo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69294
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69294
Bug ID: 69294
Summary: [6 Regression] std::isinf and std::isnan declaration
conflict
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68976
--- Comment #11 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 37354
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37354=edit
test.c.137t.graphite
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69299
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||68991
--- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu ---
With
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69299
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
The related LRA code is
case CT_MEMORY:
if (MEM_P (op)
&& satisfies_memory_constraint_p (op, cn))
win = true;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69299
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Maybe we really need to have two types of memory
constraints, ones which can be worst case always satisfied by reloading
their address into an address register and another ones which can be worst
case always
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69293
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to ForEveR from comment #0)
> In code, is_constructible::value is false,
> since use_arg receives Alloc by reference, but there is no test for this
> case in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62254
--- Comment #5 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
More reduced testcase:
typedef struct
{
char bits;
short val;
} code;
union uu
{
short us;
char b[2];
};
int a, b, c, f, g, h;
code *d;
code e;
int
fn1 ()
{
char i;
do
if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68446
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
Hi David.
Removal of lazy initialization:
diff --git a/gcc/opts.c b/gcc/opts.c
index 2add158..cc96150 100644
--- a/gcc/opts.c
+++ b/gcc/opts.c
@@ -273,7 +273,7 @@ init_opts_obstack (void)
{
static bool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68976
--- Comment #10 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 37353
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37353=edit
pdfs.tgz
For the record:
1-pre.pdf
Before scop detection
2-scops.pdf
After scop detection
3-cond.pdf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69299
Bug ID: 69299
Summary: [6 Regression] -mavx performance degradation with
r232088
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69299
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69271
--- Comment #6 from nsz at gcc dot gnu.org ---
to complete the example here is a test application:
#include
#include
extern char **environ;
int main()
{
printf(": %p, environ: %p, *environ: %p\n", , environ,
*environ);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69245
chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |chrbr at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69295
Bug ID: 69295
Summary: [6 Regression] New special math function failures
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69296
Bug ID: 69296
Summary: Problem with associate and vector subscript
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69295
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||emsr at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69293
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68799
--- Comment #13 from Matthias Klose ---
yes, this works, and I don't see any regressions in the testsuite compared to
non pgo/lto build.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55776
Sergey Semushin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Predelnik at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69295
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc-ibm-aix*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68976
--- Comment #12 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to vries from comment #9)
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-01/msg01067.html
Hmm. The patch does not address the dup PR68692, and introduces a new ICE for
that test-case.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69298
Bug ID: 69298
Summary: Array finalisers seem to be given the wrong array when
the array is a member variable.
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69297
Bug ID: 69297
Summary: [6 Regression] Performance regression after r230020
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69293
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Actually I think this is a defect in the standard, it is inconsistent to check
is_constructible but then pass inner_allocator_type&.
Consider this type:
struct use_arg {
using
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69299
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69091
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68661
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68661
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
Fixed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68586
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68767
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69300
Bug ID: 69300
Summary: g++ segfault on silly noexcept case
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69271
Rich Felker changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bugdal at aerifal dot cx
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68385
--- Comment #8 from Andre Vieira ---
It did fix it for me, sorry for the late reply.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69252
--- Comment #9 from Martin Sebor ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> a) bootstrap/regtest it
The patch passes all C, C++, and FORTRAN tests with no regressions WRT
baxeline.
I'll look at (b) next.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63577
Bernd Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernds at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68955
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
So, we have before DSE2:
...
(insn 525 192 458 12 (set (reg:SI 1 dx [orig:247 ivtmp.44 ] [247])
(mem/c:SI (plus:SI (reg/f:SI 6 bp)
(const_int -76 [0xffb4])) [4 %sfp+-52 S4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68271
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66856
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69137
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69137
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Jan 15 15:37:38 2016
New Revision: 232434
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232434=gcc=rev
Log:
2016-01-15 Richard Biener
PR debug/69137
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66856
--- Comment #12 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Jan 15 15:43:48 2016
New Revision: 232435
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232435=gcc=rev
Log:
2016-01-15 Richard Biener
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69257
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Jan 15 15:57:07 2016
New Revision: 232436
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232436=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c++/69257
* typeck.c (decay_conversion): Don't call
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68847
--- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Jan 15 15:57:17 2016
New Revision: 232438
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232438=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c++/68847
* call.c (build_cxx_call): Use
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66797
--- Comment #2 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
HPPA 1.0 and 1.1 only support a 5 bit offset in REG+D addressing modes for
floating point loads/stores. So, yes, it's quite limited.
For HPPA 2.0 and beyond a 14 bit offset is supported.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68609
--- Comment #4 from David Edelsohn ---
Author: dje
Date: Fri Jan 15 16:38:08 2016
New Revision: 232439
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232439=gcc=rev
Log:
PR target/68609
* config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_emit_msub): Delete.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69301
Bug ID: 69301
Summary: std::atomic::load() won't compile if T doesn't have
a default constructor
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65929
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69259
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(We are missing tests for filesystem::copy() though, I accidentally duplicated
the tests for fs::absolute())
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69196
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P4 |P2
--- Comment #5 from Jeffrey A. Law
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69295
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
FAIL: ext/special_functions/hyperg/check_value.cc execution test
seen also on i686-linux (dunno about x86_64, that is still doing make check).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69266
--- Comment #4 from tprince at computer dot org ---
This works only when building libstdc++ with an older g++ version.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12672
--- Comment #11 from Ivan Godard ---
OP here; better late than never :-)
IANALL, but the portions of the standard cited by Jonathan all refer to
argument evaluation, while the problem here is in the result type. Why is the
result even being
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69030
--- Comment #7 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Fri Jan 15 19:33:33 2016
New Revision: 232445
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232445=gcc=rev
Log:
2016-01-15 Vladimir Makarov
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12672
--- Comment #12 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Template argument deduction requires substituting the template arguments where
they appear. If that is in the return type, it gets substituted into the return
type. If that causes a substitution error
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68820
--- Comment #9 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #8)
> this does not reproduce for me at PPC nor x86-64. Are there any compilation
> farm machines that reproduce it?
-fno-use-linker-plugin is needed.
Following will
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69295
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Apparently ext/special_functions/hyperg/check_value.cc is also failing on i686.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64841
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67552
Bug 67552 depends on bug 68037, which changed state.
Bug 68037 Summary: x86 interrupt attribute doesn't work with DRAP
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68037
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68037
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Blocks|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69301
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63890
Bernd Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernds at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69259
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The implementation follows the specification correctly, as far as I can see:
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2014/n4099.html#fs.op.copy
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12672
--- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Ivan Godard from comment #11)
> IANALL, but the portions of the standard cited by Jonathan all refer to
> argument evaluation,
Maybe you're confusing template arguments with function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69302
Bug ID: 69302
Summary: Using bswap in template function with
-ftrack-macro-expansion=0 results in a false compiler
error
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69303
Bug ID: 69303
Summary: Fortran character common block equivalence lto
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68976
--- Comment #13 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
new patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-01/msg01139.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69302
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68976
--- Comment #14 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to vries from comment #13)
> new patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-01/msg01139.html
new patch does not fix dup. Will reopen dup.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69304
Bug ID: 69304
Summary: Fortran logical common block equivalence lto
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69302
--- Comment #2 from Alexander Kondratskiy ---
Created attachment 37363
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37363=edit
Preprocessed source that results in error
g++ -std=c++1y -c -Werror -Wall -Wextra preprocessed.cpp -o test.o
1 - 100 of 190 matches
Mail list logo