https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79576
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79756
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79971
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79977
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59859
Bug 59859 depends on bug 79977, which changed state.
Bug 79977 Summary: [6 Regression] [graphite] ICE in outermost_loop_in_sese, at
sese.c:300 w/ -O2 -floop-nest-optimize
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79977
What|Rem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79732
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Mar 16 08:07:29 2017
New Revision: 246188
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246188&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-03-16 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80004
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80063
Bug ID: 80063
Summary: gcc/asan.c: PVS-Studio: Incorrect Block Delimitation
(CWE-483)
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038
--- Comment #11 from Edgar Fournival ---
It is also interesting to note that GCC 5.x is not impacted.
Even if the given example code will not compile on GCC 5 (ICE in lower_stmt, at
gimple-low.c:397 for the line "cilk_spawn walk(vnew, size);"),
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79255
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work|6.3.1 |5.4.1
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80055
Frederic Marchal changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fmarchal at perso dot be
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038
--- Comment #12 from Xi Ruoyao ---
(In reply to Edgar Fournival from comment #11)
> It is also interesting to note that GCC 5.x is not impacted.
>
> Even if the given example code will not compile on GCC 5 (ICE in lower_stmt,
> at gimple-low.c:3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038
--- Comment #13 from Florent Hivert ---
I've not yet been able to find a small example that shows the regression due to
GCC5 ICE. In particular, I'm not sure the problem mentioned by Fournival is not
due to a bug in my code (See my question of
ht
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038
--- Comment #14 from Xi Ruoyao ---
(In reply to Florent Hivert from comment #13)
> I've not yet been able to find a small example that shows the regression due
> to GCC5 ICE. In particular, I'm not sure the problem mentioned by Fournival
> is not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80044
--- Comment #1 from Alan Modra ---
Revising my original comments..
According to the gcc docs -static is supposed to just prevent linking with
dynamic libraries. I agree that this is traditional linker behaviour.
That means, for example, that -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80064
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80064
Bug ID: 80064
Summary: [7 Regression] _Iter_cmp_iter instantiates bogus type
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-valid
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80064
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.8.5, 5.4.1, 6.3.1
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038
--- Comment #15 from Edgar Fournival ---
(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #14)
> Although I don't understand all the code in the Github repo, but GCC 6 indeed
> moved the temporary construction (initialization) and destruction code to the
> pa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80064
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
#include
#include
bool greater(int, int);
int main()
{
std::vector v;
std::make_heap::iterator, bool (int, int)>
(v.begin(), v.end(), greater);
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79861
Frederic Marchal changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fmarchal at perso dot be
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80064
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
https://github.com/cython/cython/issues/1632
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038
--- Comment #16 from Xi Ruoyao ---
On 2017-03-16 10:16 +, cont...@edgar-fournival.fr wrote:
> Bisection?
I am bisecting now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038
--- Comment #17 from Xi Ruoyao ---
A simple test case for bisecting:
extern "C" {
int x();
int y(int);
int z();
}
int z()
{
int ret = _Cilk_spawn y(x());
return ret;
}
Compile with '-fcilkplus -S'. According to cilkplus spec, x() should
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80064
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80064
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038
--- Comment #18 from Xi Ruoyao ---
> Compile with '-fcilkplus -S'. According to cilkplus spec, x() should be
> evaluated in the child (for the asm produced by GCC, in _cilk_spn_0).
> If you find "call x" in the asm of "z" instead of "_cilk_spn_0"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038
--- Comment #19 from Edgar Fournival ---
Thanks for your explanations. I will investigate on my side and check the
generated assembly of our project. Please keep us posted with the results of
your bisection.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78644
--- Comment #6 from Zdenek Sojka ---
Created attachment 40981
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40981&action=edit
another testcase
$ x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -Og -finline-functions-called-once testcase.c
-Wno-psabi
==20182== In
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038
--- Comment #20 from Xi Ruoyao ---
On 2017-03-16 12:31 +, cont...@edgar-fournival.fr wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038
>
> --- Comment #19 from Edgar Fournival ---
> Thanks for your explanations. I will investigate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69499
koenigni at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||koenigni at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79956
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67440
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I think this should be str(typ.unqualified()) otherwise it doesn't work on GDB
7.6:
Python Exception 'gdb.Type' object has no
attribute 'name'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79922
Frederic Marchal changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fmarchal at perso dot be
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79883
Frederic Marchal changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fmarchal at perso dot be
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80065
Bug ID: 80065
Summary: [7 Regression] sibling-call guard no longer working
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80066
Bug ID: 80066
Summary: dead stores and initializations pointed out by clang
--analyze
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80066
--- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Created attachment 40982
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40982&action=edit
list of issues
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80066
--- Comment #2 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Created attachment 40983
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40983&action=edit
proposed patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67440
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Thu Mar 16 14:11:48 2017
New Revision: 246196
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246196&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/67440 make pretty printers work with GDB 7.6 again
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79905
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80065
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80064
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Thu Mar 16 14:32:07 2017
New Revision: 246197
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246197&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/80064 make heap algorithms work with function types
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80067
Bug ID: 80067
Summary: ICE in fold_comparison with -fsanitize=undefined
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52471
--- Comment #5 from Kyle Markley ---
Indeed, it's been a long time. I am no longer interested in trying to bring up
gcc on OpenBSD by myself, so, no, I won't try it with a newer version. This
bug ticket may be discarded.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80042
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80043
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80050
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80054
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80056
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80059
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80054
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |wschmidt at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80048
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80053
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79905
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
The frontend should have assigned the same TYPE_CANONICAL here. I don't know
much about the vector keyword magic we have on ppc.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52471
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80064
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|rejects-valid |
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80068
Bug ID: 80068
Summary: [Intel MPX] "internal compiler error" on 483.xalancbmk
in SPEC CPU 2006
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79511
--- Comment #15 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Thu Mar 16 15:27:45 2017
New Revision: 246199
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246199&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/79511 fix endianness of UTF-16 data
PR libstdc++/7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79980
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Thu Mar 16 15:27:51 2017
New Revision: 246200
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246200&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/79980 fix BOM detection, maxcode checks, UCS2 handling
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80041
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Thu Mar 16 15:28:02 2017
New Revision: 246202
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246202&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/80041 fix codecvt_utf16 to use UTF-16 not UTF-8
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80054
--- Comment #3 from Bill Schmidt ---
Reproducible on ppc64le without any -march.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80069
Bug ID: 80069
Summary: LTO: ICE at graphite-sese-to-poly.c:1176
Product: gcc
Version: 6.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: lto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80032
--- Comment #5 from Jan Smets ---
I think suggested patch might generate bad code. (but hard to track down on my
embedded target, it's stuck at a point where I don't have exceptions/backtraces
available yet).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79886
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Mar 16 16:27:08 2017
New Revision: 246203
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246203&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR fortran/79886
* tree-diagnostic.c (default_tree_printer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79886
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[5/6/7 Regression] ICE in |[5/6 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80069
--- Comment #1 from Manuel Lauss ---
Created attachment 40986
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40986&action=edit
preprocessed source
x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -O3 -march=haswell -mtune=haswell
-fexpensive-optimizations -fgraphi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80067
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79905
--- Comment #6 from Michael Meissner ---
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 03:10:19PM +, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79905
Generally, the "vector" keyword is a conditional macro that looks at the ne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80070
Bug ID: 80070
Summary: -Wmisleading-indentation disabled on -E (or when using
distcc)
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80010
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Mar 16 16:50:27 2017
New Revision: 246204
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246204&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR fortran/80010
* parse.c (gfc_ascii_statement): Use !$AC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80059
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80070
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
The warning is effective disabled when #line directives are present, in
should_warn_for_misleading_indentation:
/* Don't attempt to compare indentation if #line or # 44 "file"-style
directives are pre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80067
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Started with r230365 - Merge C++ delayed folding branch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80067
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.4
Summary|ICE in fold_compa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79980
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=79980
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
It's just a dumb error where I used a typedef that was previously defined, the
fix is:
static underlying_type::type
to_integer(codecvt_mode m)
{ return static_cast::type>(m); }
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79980
--- Comment #7 from Steve Kargl ---
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 05:13:51PM +, redi at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
> It's just a dumb error where I used a typedef that was previously defined, the
> fix is:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79980
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Yes, in about 60 seconds. There's no need to revert anything.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79980
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Thu Mar 16 17:22:47 2017
New Revision: 246205
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246205&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/79980 fix target type of cast
PR libstdc++/79980
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80069
--- Comment #2 from Manuel Lauss ---
Created attachment 40987
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40987&action=edit
condensed preprocessed source
condensed the source a bit, narrowed it down to this:
x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -O3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79883
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80059
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
This seems to fix it:
--- a/gcc/cp/except.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/except.c
@@ -271,7 +271,7 @@ build_must_not_throw_expr (tree body, tree cond)
cond = perform_implicit_conversion_flags (boolean_type_node, cond
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80053
--- Comment #2 from Alexander Monakov ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> The question is whether the transform at hand is valid if the label is
> duplicated
> but all referers still refer to the original one (so if the label is dr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79883
--- Comment #5 from Frederic Marchal ---
I agree with your proposal to reword the messages. It is in line with what I
did with the French translation to circumvent the problem of the attribute
being used as a plain English word.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80071
Bug ID: 80071
Summary: __LINE__ is expanded incorrectly
Product: gcc
Version: 6.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: preprocessor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80072
Bug ID: 80072
Summary: ICE in gimple_build_assign_1 with -O3
-march=broadwell/skylake-avx512
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79922
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80071
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
IIRC multiple line macros function uses are an extension to the language.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80055
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80071
--- Comment #2 from Samuel Lijin ---
They are? That's a legitimate question, I'd never heard that before but I can
totally believe it; I am looking through N4606 right now, though, and can't
find anything that implies one way or another (maybe [l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71437
--- Comment #20 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Thu Mar 16 19:21:23 2017
New Revision: 246207
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246207&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/71437
* tree-ssa-dom.c (pfn_simplify)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71437
--- Comment #21 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Thu Mar 16 19:21:33 2017
New Revision: 246208
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246208&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/71437
* tree-ssa-dom.c (dom_opt_dom_w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80059
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Ah, no, that's wrong.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80073
Bug ID: 80073
Summary: [7 Regression] ICE with virtual base
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
Priority:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80071
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71294
--- Comment #18 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Thu Mar 16 20:09:21 2017
New Revision: 246209
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246209&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2017-03-16 Michael Meissner
PR target/71294
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80054
--- Comment #4 from Bill Schmidt ---
PRE creates a situation where a conditional SLSR candidate depends on a PHI
that occurs prior to the basis for the candidate. SLSR doesn't notice this and
eventually creates a phi basis that is not dominated
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80071
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor ---
I should mention: the GCC __COUNTER__ macro can be used to generate a unique
integer each time it's expanded.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80071
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor ---
Another reference worth mentioning here is section 6.5 Value of the
__LINE__ macro in WG21 document N4220:
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2014/n4220.pdf. It
discusses the issue raised her
1 - 100 of 118 matches
Mail list logo
