[Bug target/95798] New: Initialization code --- suboptimal

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95798 Bug ID: 95798 Summary: Initialization code --- suboptimal Product: gcc Version: 9.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target

[Bug analyzer/95042] ICE in can_merge_p, at analyzer/region-model.cc:2053

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95042 Dávid Bolvanský changed: What|Removed |Added CC||david.bolvansky at gmail dot com ---

[Bug c++/95797] Can std::allocator.deallocate newed pointer during constant evaluation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95797 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||accepts-invalid Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/95789] [10/11 Regression] Const method is allowed to return non-const reference on template class

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95789 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |10.2 CC|

[Bug tree-optimization/95799] New: Assumed conjunctions are not broken down into clauses if their pureness is checked first

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95799 Bug ID: 95799 Summary: Assumed conjunctions are not broken down into clauses if their pureness is checked first Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED K

[Bug fortran/95687] ICE in get_unique_hashed_string, at fortran/class.c:508

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95687 Manfred Schwarb changed: What|Removed |Added CC||manfred99 at gmx dot ch --- Comment #6

[Bug fortran/89661] FAIL: gfortran.dg/class_61.f90 -O (internal compiler error)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89661 --- Comment #5 from Manfred Schwarb --- This might have been solved by https://gcc.gnu.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=gcc.git;h=ac932bfcd21e9523fa2b880ae8138aef79da7f54 , at least I don't see it anymore in today's build. As the crash of class_61.f90 is a b

[Bug c/95800] New: DJGPP 9.3.1 doesn't parse C files correctly

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95800 Bug ID: 95800 Summary: DJGPP 9.3.1 doesn't parse C files correctly Product: gcc Version: 9.3.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug c/95800] DJGPP 9.3.1 doesn't parse C files correctly

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95800 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug c/95800] DJGPP 9.3.1 doesn't parse C files correctly

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95800 --- Comment #2 from Teo Samarzija --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1) > Perhaps log2 is in DJGPP a macro (which the C standard allows)? > In that case, you either need to #undef that macro, or > use double (log2)(double x) { ... } I

[Bug c/95800] DJGPP 9.3.1 doesn't parse C files correctly

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95800 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/95801] New: Optimiser does not exploit the fact that an integer divisor cannot be zero

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95801 Bug ID: 95801 Summary: Optimiser does not exploit the fact that an integer divisor cannot be zero Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: misse

[Bug c++/95736] coroutine method improperly copies awaitable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95736 Iain Sandoe changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |10.2 Assignee|unassigned at gcc

[Bug c++/95711] namespace alias fails inside coroutine

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95711 Iain Sandoe changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Assignee|unassigned at gcc d

[Bug target/95802] New: Duplicated login in host_detect_local_cpu and get_builtin_code_for_version

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95802 Bug ID: 95802 Summary: Duplicated login in host_detect_local_cpu and get_builtin_code_for_version Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: norma

[Bug fortran/50410] [8/9/10/11 Regression] ICE in record_reference, pointer variable in data statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50410 --- Comment #41 from Dominique d'Humieres --- In my working tree I had the following patch --- /opt/gcc/_clean-svn//gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c 2020-01-05 11:44:35.0 +0100 +++ /opt/gcc/work-cvs/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c 2020-01-05 11:

[Bug target/95737] PPC: Unnecessary extsw after negative less than

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95737 --- Comment #4 from wschmidt at linux dot ibm.com --- On 6/19/20 12:43 PM, jens.seifert at de dot ibm.com wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95737 > > Jens Seifert changed: > > What|Removed |

[Bug target/95737] PPC: Unnecessary extsw after negative less than

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95737 Segher Boessenkool changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |segher at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug tree-optimization/95803] New: Failure to optimize strlen in certain situations properly, instead leading to weird code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95803 Bug ID: 95803 Summary: Failure to optimize strlen in certain situations properly, instead leading to weird code Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED S

[Bug target/95798] Initialization code --- suboptimal

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95798 --- Comment #1 from zero at smallinteger dot com --- (note that changing the array declaration to be initialized does not result in the individual array writes being optimized away, as one might expect at first glance)

[Bug libstdc++/90436] Redundant size checking in vector

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90436 --- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse --- // possibly assumes that ptrdiff_t and size_t have the same size size_type _M_check_len_one(const char* __str) const { ptrdiff_t __n = sizeof(_Tp); ptrdiff_t __ms = max_s

[Bug target/95802] Duplicated logic in host_detect_local_cpu and get_builtin_code_for_version

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95802 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/50410] [8/9/10/11 Regression] ICE in record_reference, pointer variable in data statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50410 --- Comment #42 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #41) > In my working tree I had the following patch This still ICEs on comment#23 z1. Slightly rewriting that case, one gets a reasonable error mes

[Bug c++/88601] We may consider adding __builtin_convertvector and __builtin_shufflevector for better compatibility with Clang

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88601 Shawn Landden changed: What|Removed |Added CC||shawn at git dot icu --- Comment #5 from

[Bug pch/56549] #pragma once ineffective with BOM in include file

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56549 xaizek at posteo dot net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||xaizek at posteo dot net --- C

[Bug fortran/93635] Get ICE instead of error message if user incorrectly equivalences allocateable variables that are in a NAMELIST group

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93635 Ev Drikos changed: What|Removed |Added CC||drikosev at gmail dot com --- Comment #3 fro

[Bug fortran/89661] FAIL: gfortran.dg/class_61.f90 -O (internal compiler error)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89661 --- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres --- Not seen in https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-testresults/2020-June/564061.html

[Bug libstdc++/90436] Redundant size checking in vector

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90436 --- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse --- (side note not related to the redundant size checking) It is surprising how, in the code from comment 2, adding v.reserve(1000) does not help, it even slows the program down slightly here (yes, that's rather ha

[Bug fortran/50410] [8/9/10/11 Regression] ICE in record_reference, pointer variable in data statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50410 --- Comment #43 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to anlauf from comment #42) > The following patch does the magic (not regtested): > > diff --git a/gcc/fortran/expr.c b/gcc/fortran/expr.c > index 8daa7bb8d06..0a995ec3ae7 100644 > ---

[Bug c++/95510] [coroutines] ICE with consteval operator co_await

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95510 Iain Sandoe changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |WAITING --- Comment #2 from Iain Sandoe -

[Bug tree-optimization/95801] Optimiser does not exploit the fact that an integer divisor cannot be zero

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95801 --- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse --- Except when dereferencing a pointer (?), gcc seldom uses an operation to derive properties on the operands, it mostly derives properties on the result. That's in large part because the information you are getti

[Bug fortran/93635] Get ICE instead of error message if user incorrectly equivalences allocateable variables that are in a NAMELIST group

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93635 --- Comment #4 from Steve Kargl --- On Sun, Jun 21, 2020 at 05:44:51PM +, drikosev at gmail dot com wrote: > > The attached patch contains various test cases for the PR's you mentioned at: > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.lang.fortran/

[Bug c++/95505] [coroutines] ICE assert with get_return_object_on_allocation_failure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95505 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a59a15bcd27fa626b2b0912a1d7abd6df4f3d6cf commit r10-8334-ga59a15bcd27fa626b2b0912a1d7abd6df4f3d6cf Author: Iain Sandoe Dat

[Bug c/95804] New: ice in generate_code_for_partition, at tree-loop-distribution.c:1323

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95804 Bug ID: 95804 Summary: ice in generate_code_for_partition, at tree-loop-distribution.c:1323 Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/95505] [coroutines] ICE assert with get_return_object_on_allocation_failure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95505 Iain Sandoe changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/93635] Get ICE instead of error message if user incorrectly equivalences allocateable variables that are in a NAMELIST group

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93635 --- Comment #5 from Ev Drikos --- (In reply to Ev Drikos from comment #3) > Created attachment 48765 [details] > Various Test Cases, including one for PR/93635 > > Hello S. Kargl, > > The attached patch contains various test cases for the PR's

[Bug bootstrap/95805] New: [11 regression] gcc/recog.h:301:30: error: too many arguments to function call, expected 1, have 2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95805 Bug ID: 95805 Summary: [11 regression] gcc/recog.h:301:30: error: too many arguments to function call, expected 1, have 2 Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRME

[Bug bootstrap/95805] [11 regression] gcc/recog.h:301:30: error: too many arguments to function call, expected 1, have 2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95805 Gerald Pfeifer changed: What|Removed |Added Host||i386-unknown-freebsd11.3 --- Comment #1

[Bug c++/95806] New: Result of call with reference argument to newed object is cached during constant evaluation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95806 Bug ID: 95806 Summary: Result of call with reference argument to newed object is cached during constant evaluation Product: gcc Version: 10.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/95807] New: GCC accepts "void value not ignored as it ought to be" in function template

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95807 Bug ID: 95807 Summary: GCC accepts "void value not ignored as it ought to be" in function template Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: acce

[Bug c++/95808] New: Can mismatch non-array new/delete with array new/delete during constant evaluation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95808 Bug ID: 95808 Summary: Can mismatch non-array new/delete with array new/delete during constant evaluation Product: gcc Version: 10.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Sever

[Bug c++/95807] GCC accepts "void value not ignored as it ought to be" in function template

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95807 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- I think it is rejected at instanition time.

[Bug c++/95807] GCC accepts "void value not ignored as it ought to be" in function template

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95807 --- Comment #2 from Haoxin Tu --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > I think it is rejected at instanition time. Hi, Andrew. Shouldn't it be rejected at compiling time? Please take a look at another case, test.cc $cat test.cc void f

[Bug c++/95809] New: GCC treats inline namespace declaration as "ambiguous"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95809 Bug ID: 95809 Summary: GCC treats inline namespace declaration as "ambiguous" Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: rejects-valid Severity: normal