https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66227
--- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Thu Nov 17 07:52:24 2016
New Revision: 242535
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242535&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-11-17 Janus Weil
PR fortran/66227
* sim
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78386
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
Does -ffp-contract=off help?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78387
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78357
--- Comment #11 from Sebastian Huber ---
Thanks for your kind help. Would it be possible to back port this to GCC 6
also?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78357
--- Comment #10 from Chung-Lin Tang ---
Author: cltang
Date: Thu Nov 17 06:26:56 2016
New Revision: 242534
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242534&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-11-17 Chung-Lin Tang
PR target/78357
* config/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78304
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Even though that with my patch we expansion_point_location_if_in_system_header
the caret location, it still points to the location in the system header, so
the diagnostics is suppressed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78351
--- Comment #20 from Steve Kargl ---
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 01:44:45AM +, sgk at troutmask dot
apl.washington.edu wrote:
>
> In the above, you are hitting an end-of-record. I would need
> to go read the Standard to see what happens in this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78304
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78351
--- Comment #19 from Steve Kargl ---
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 12:43:40AM +, kevin.b.beard at nasa dot gov wrote:
> Many thanks to Jerry DeLisle [jvdeli...@charter.net]; he made us realize
> that an internal record is now not treated the sa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78285
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78285
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Thu Nov 17 01:23:19 2016
New Revision: 242532
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242532&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/78285
* c-common.c (c_add_case_label): Turn error_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78387
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Benson ---
I couldn't find anything in the OpenMP specifications which addresses this
issue - so presumably it's undefined behavior as far as OpenMP is concerned.
But it seems that internal file writes were intended to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78390
Bug ID: 78390
Summary: Bootstrap failure: match.pd: cannot determine type of
operand
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78252
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78252
--- Comment #2 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Created attachment 40062
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40062&action=edit
reduced source code
I've reduced the original source to the attached. This emits 4 function
symbols, 2 of whi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58001
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78351
--- Comment #17 from Dr. Kevin B. Beard ---
Hi,
Many thanks to Jerry DeLisle [jvdeli...@charter.net]; he made us realize
that an internal record is now not treated the same as an external record! I
didn't think of that.
In the atta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78351
--- Comment #18 from Dr. Kevin B. Beard ---
Created attachment 40061
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40061&action=edit
x2.dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58001
--- Comment #14 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Thu Nov 17 00:18:18 2016
New Revision: 242530
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242530&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-11-16 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/58001
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70548
Henrique Andrade changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hcma at unscrambl dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78387
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78355
--- Comment #7 from pipcet at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #6)
> > The analysis looks right for me. Although this code had a lot of troubles
> > until it was stabilized and came to the current state. So the change mi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78386
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Wed, 16 Nov 2016, pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> Most likely the use of fma.
Which applies with current x86_64 just as it does with powerpc. It should
be possible to reduce such a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78373
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78378
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[5/6/7 Regression] wrong|[5/6 Regression] wrong code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78378
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Nov 16 23:22:16 2016
New Revision: 242526
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242526&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/78378
* combine.c (make_extraction): U
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78325
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70890
--- Comment #10 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Wed Nov 16 23:10:55 2016
New Revision: 242525
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242525&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
R_MIPS_JALR failures
This is a fix for my PR70890 patch, which incorrectly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78325
--- Comment #4 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Wed Nov 16 23:10:55 2016
New Revision: 242525
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242525&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
R_MIPS_JALR failures
This is a fix for my PR70890 patch, which incorrectly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78373
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Nov 16 22:42:24 2016
New Revision: 242523
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242523&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/78373 - ICE with TREE_CONSTANT reference
* decl.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78389
Bug ID: 78389
Summary: list::merge and list::sort are not exception safe
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77848
--- Comment #24 from Bill Schmidt ---
The above commit doesn't yet solve the problem, but enables more outer-loop
vectorization in preparation for the fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77848
--- Comment #23 from Bill Schmidt ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Wed Nov 16 22:17:10 2016
New Revision: 242520
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242520&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-11-16 Bill Schmidt
PR tree-optimization/77848
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66742
--- Comment #9 from TC ---
The ugly fix in Comment #6 should be performant, if, well, ugly.
It may be worth considering holding the nodes via a different type. There's no
real reason why the temporary holders need to be a `list` or have a copy o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78324
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
Root cause is that the substring loc code isn't set up to cope with
-ftrack-macro-expansion=0, and attempts to handle this location:
../../src/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/builtin-sprintf-2.c:95:1: note:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51119
--- Comment #47 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Wed Nov 16 21:54:25 2016
New Revision: 242518
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242518&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-11-16 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortran/51119
* M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78355
--- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou ---
> The analysis looks right for me. Although this code had a lot of troubles
> until it was stabilized and came to the current state. So the change might
> create some new failures but I hope it will not.
O
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58001
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78388
Bug ID: 78388
Summary: Bogus "declaration shadows template parameter" error
with parenthesized function-style casts
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78386
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc64le-unknown-linux-g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68778
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78285
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78383
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
I mean r160122 or r160124.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78386
--- Comment #2 from Breno Leitao ---
I did further tests with older versions, and the problem is also reproducible,
so, this is not a regression.
These are the versions I tested also:
* gcc-5 (Debian 5.4.1-3) 5.4.1 20161019
* gcc-4 (Debian
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68377
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78387
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I thought they are supposed to be, at least that is what we had unit_lock,
u->lock etc. for. So has something in libgfortran changed so that it doesn't
properly lock the units anymore?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78383
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78387
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Benson ---
OK - thanks. I hadn't realized that the internal I/O operations weren't
threadsafe - I guess I've just been fortunate to avoid this with previous
versions of gfortran. I'll update my code to use critical sect
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78387
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
n/Galacticus/Tools/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.0.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc-trunk/configure --prefix=/home/abenson/Galacticus/Tools
--enable-languages=c,c++,fortran --disable-multilib
Thread model: posix
gcc version 7.0.0 20161116 (experimental) (GCC)
$
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72823
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78386
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Most likely the use of fma.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78386
Bug ID: 78386
Summary: Powerpc64le: optimization -O2 and higher cause math
inconsitency
Product: gcc
Version: 6.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72823
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Nov 16 20:10:27 2016
New Revision: 242510
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242510&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR bootstrap/72823
* configure.ac (ENABLE_ASSERT_CHECKING)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78299
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[6/7 Regression] ICE in |[6 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61409
--- Comment #24 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
OK. It's coming back to me now. And yes, Aldy, it was the edge 9->6 :-)
So we have a PHI argument that references an uninitialized variable. There is
a control predicate for that PHI argument, call it p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69298
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Here is a further reduced test case, based on Dominique's variant in comment
#2, which (I think) runs into the same runtime-segfault when calling
stuff_1d_finaliser ...
module stuff_mod
implic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78385
Bug ID: 78385
Summary: Build of libgcc2 for target arm-eabi fails, if
configuration --with-abi=apcs-gnu is used (in
GCC-Build)
Product: gcc
Version: 6.2.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78351
--- Comment #16 from Steve Kargl ---
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 06:36:58PM +, kevin.b.beard at nasa dot gov wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78351
>
> --- Comment #13 from Dr. Kevin B. Beard ---
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for looki
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78351
--- Comment #15 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Well, on further investigation I see that we do have a flag in read_sf to
signal a comma. It does not have this flag in read_sf_internal, So definitely
does not work on strings. My bet is that when we/I spli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78374
Markus Eisenmann changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78384
Bug ID: 78384
Summary: [7 Regression] ICE: verify_flow_info failed (error:
wrong outgoing edge flags at end of bb 15)
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78351
--- Comment #14 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Try to find what you want in http://www.fortran.com/F77_std/rjcnf0001.html.
Good luck!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78378
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61409
--- Comment #23 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Sorry, I can't remember if I meant 9->5 or 9->6 at this point :-) I need to
refamiliarize myself with this stuff again to make sure I've got the basic
concepts before reviewing the patch.
But you can prob
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78351
--- Comment #13 from Dr. Kevin B. Beard ---
Hi,
Thanks for looking at this. I'm sorry to say I don't have access to the
official F77 standards,
perhaps you could send me a copy of the whole? The section you quoted doesn't
seems to
to exclude
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78324
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50217
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78299
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Nov 16 18:19:09 2016
New Revision: 242507
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242507&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR fortran/78299
* omp-low.c (expand_omp_for_static_nochun
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51119
--- Comment #46 from Thomas Koenig ---
(In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #44)
> Yes I am aware of these. I was willing to live with them, but if it is a
> problem, we can remove those options easy enough.
I think it is no big deal, but on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78378
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Scratch that, I've missed there the 8 SUBREG_BYTE. That one is fine.
What is wrong is combine_simplify_rtx turning
(set (reg:SI 99 [ x ])
(and:SI (subreg:SI (truncate:HI (lshiftrt:TI (mult:TI (zero_exten
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41539
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44131
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org
Tar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44863
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44864
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45795
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org
Tar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49961
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51791
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org
Tar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51207
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51943
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org
Tar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55935
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56929
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56845
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57145
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org
Tar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57456
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org
Tar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57922
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78383
Bug ID: 78383
Summary: label as values ICE with C++ lambda
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimizati
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58947
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58658
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org
Tar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60834
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org
Tar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60255
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60322
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60550
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63553
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org
Tar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78314
nsz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64589
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64674
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67091
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78314
--- Comment #3 from nsz at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: nsz
Date: Wed Nov 16 17:27:04 2016
New Revision: 242505
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242505&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR libgfortran/78314] Fix ieee_support_halting
ieee_support_haltin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64209
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
1 - 100 of 418 matches
Mail list logo