https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96190
--- Comment #1 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
Sent https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-July/549983.html for
review. If it's a reasonable thing to do I'll convert the rest of targets.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96192
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-07-14
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45337
markeggleston at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Stat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95981
markeggleston at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||markeggleston at gcc do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96186
Hongtao.liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||crazylht at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96193
Bug ID: 96193
Summary: No ADL for hidden friend in call with explicit
template arguments
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96193
--- Comment #1 from Johel Ernesto Guerrero Peña ---
That actually compiles if I add -std=c++20. If the call is itself dependent, it
fails to compile. See https://godbolt.org/z/KqGhKE.
```C++
template
struct B
{
template
friend void f(B)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96038
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Mark Eggleston
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9ad19a66d751ab48515ef61f830e192ae4078b93
commit r11-2075-g9ad19a66d751ab48515ef61f830e192ae4078b93
Author: Mark Eggleston
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96038
markeggleston at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resol
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96194
Bug ID: 96194
Summary: 10.1.1: ICE in assign_temp, at function.c:984 during
RTL pass: expand
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95604
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Matthias Klose :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6a48d12475cdb7375b98277f8bc089715feeeafe
commit r11-2076-g6a48d12475cdb7375b98277f8bc089715feeeafe
Author: Matthias Klose
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96191
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rsandifo at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95604
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Matthias Klose
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8147c741df97ee02aa64c099c6b360e6a93384e1
commit r10-8492-g8147c741df97ee02aa64c099c6b360e6a93384e1
Author: Matthias Klose
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93550
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96193
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Johel Ernesto Guerrero Peña from comment #1)
> That actually compiles if I add -std=c++20.
That is correct, isn't it?
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2017/p0846r0.html is a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93733
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
With
--- ../_clean/gcc/fortran/io.c 2020-07-01 18:25:56.0 +0200
+++ gcc/fortran/io.c2020-07-14 11:06:50.0 +0200
@@ -894,7 +894,13 @@ data_desc:
&for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93733
--- Comment #3 from Thomas Henlich ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #2)
> Does it look good?
Agreed, that should fix the bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78288
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #48869|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96194
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confir
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67311
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:174e79bf73331b41b7a14dffd45ed8293487f0e0
commit r11-2078-g174e79bf73331b41b7a14dffd45ed8293487f0e0
Author: Tobias Burnus
Date: Tu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96194
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|10.1.1: ICE in assign_temp, |[10/11 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96194
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96194
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
--- gcc/expr.c.jj 2020-07-13 19:09:33.173872178 +0200
+++ gcc/expr.c 2020-07-14 13:07:26.228801996 +0200
@@ -8382,7 +8382,9 @@ expand_constructor (tree exp, rtx target
|| GET_CODE (target) == PA
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67311
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96194
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 48874
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48874&action=edit
gcc11-pr96194.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93733
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Agreed, that should fix the bug.
But reject valid too! AFAIU this cannot captured ay the format level.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93733
--- Comment #5 from Thomas Henlich ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #4)
> But reject valid too! AFAIU this cannot captured ay the format level.
Please explain, what valid code according to Fortran 2008 does -std=f2008
reject?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96194
--- Comment #6 from Manuel Lauss ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> Created attachment 48874 [details]
> gcc11-pr96194.patch
>
> Untested fix.
It fixes the mesa build, thank you!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95612
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Mark Eggleston
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:81072bab8d1e48ee83d9711dcb559ea1e019b351
commit r11-2080-g81072bab8d1e48ee83d9711dcb559ea1e019b351
Author: Mark Eggleston
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93733
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Please explain, what valid code according to Fortran 2008 does -std=f2008
> reject?
FAIL: gfortran.dg/fmt_g0_4.f08 -O (test for excess errors)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93733
--- Comment #7 from Thomas Henlich ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #6)
> > Please explain, what valid code according to Fortran 2008 does -std=f2008
> > reject?
>
> FAIL: gfortran.dg/fmt_g0_4.f08 -O (test for excess errors
;
#pragma omp declare simd
int
zp (int);
void
qh (int oh)
{
#pragma omp simd
for (by = 0; by < oh; ++by)
by = zp (by);
}
---
GCC version: 11.0.0 20200714 (experimental)
Result:
pr92347.c: In function ‘qh’:
pr92347.c:13:1: error: invalid conversion in gimple call
13 | qh (int
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92311
--- Comment #9 from Tobias Burnus ---
(In reply to Nichols A. Romero from comment #0)
> The error for the OpenMP is shown below:
>29 |!$omp target data use_device_ptr(this_bin)
> | 1
> Err
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92181
Erich Erstu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hyena at hyena dot net.ee
--- Comment #3 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95645
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 96192 ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96192
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||elver at google dot com
--- Comment #2 from H.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93727
jvdelisle at charter dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at charter dot ne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92929
--- Comment #10 from Thomas Schwinge ---
(In reply to Thomas Schwinge from comment #4)
> The recent r279626 "OpenACC 2.6 deep copy: middle-end parts" contains
> changes related to this
... some of which have now gotten reverted in recent commit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92181
--- Comment #4 from Erich Erstu ---
I also found out that when I try to populate a constexpr array using a trivial
constexpr function that passes on the argument initializer list then I get the
same error.
This does not work any more within the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95820
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9eb370f19c1198e62d47eae74531e54d0b098bf1
commit r11-2085-g9eb370f19c1198e62d47eae74531e54d0b098bf1
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: We
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95820
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[10/11 Regression] ICE in |[10 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96195
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96194
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b1d389d60d1929c7528ef984925ea010e3bf2c1a
commit r11-2086-gb1d389d60d1929c7528ef984925ea010e3bf2c1a
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Tu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96194
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:de70758207a6b2d8d3d6bbd3fc564ca736ed094f
commit r10-8493-gde70758207a6b2d8d3d6bbd3fc564ca736ed094f
Author: Jakub Jelinek
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96194
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96162
--- Comment #1 from Haoxin Tu ---
Add a more case.
$cat p.cc
#include
int a() {
for (static int & b) {}
}
$g++ p.cc
test.cc: In function ‘int a()’:
test.cc:3:24: error: expected ‘;’ before ‘)’ token
3 | for (static int & b) {}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96196
Bug ID: 96196
Summary: infinite loop removed by optimizer
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96196
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96196
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Sta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96185
--- Comment #2 from Will Wray ---
On the Clang ticket, linked above, Richard Smith comments:
Instead of the proposed direction, I'd suggest we (and other implementers)
prioritize implementation of https://wg21.link/p1061r1
(which is on its
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96192
--- Comment #3 from Sunil Pandey ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> Hmm, but there's no local variable to copy here? Are you refering to the
> result decl from b we materialize in c? This would be the same case
> as for example
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96185
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Will Wray from comment #2)
> Would an early-delivered future feature require an opt-in switch?
The relevant -std switch would be the opt-in.
> Can P1061 be default enabled under earlier std f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96185
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Will Wray from comment #0)
> (Submitting simultaneous requests for each of GCC, Clang and MSVC.
> Coordination between vendors will be beneficial for portability.)
This seems like the wrong a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96185
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96197
Bug ID: 96197
Summary: Excess memory consumption, positive correlation with
the size of a constexpr array
Product: gcc
Version: 9.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96185
--- Comment #6 from Will Wray ---
Thanks for the comment on approach Jonathan:
I'd noticed some collaboration and agreement around previous builtins
such as __builtin_bit_cast which is now available in both GCC & Clang
(though with some small in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96185
--- Comment #7 from Will Wray ---
Oops, __builtin_bit_cast available in MSVC and Clang (when in GCC?)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96185
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
But __builtin_bit_cast is the compiler magic to support std::bit_cast, it's not
just a non-standard extension. PR 93121 is a request for std::bit_cast in GCC.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49973
--- Comment #22 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Lewis Hyatt :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:004bb936d6d5f177af26ad4905595e843d5665a5
commit r11-2092-g004bb936d6d5f177af26ad4905595e843d5665a5
Author: Lewis Hyatt
Date: Tue J
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86904
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Lewis Hyatt :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:004bb936d6d5f177af26ad4905595e843d5665a5
commit r11-2092-g004bb936d6d5f177af26ad4905595e843d5665a5
Author: Lewis Hyatt
Date: Tue Ju
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96185
--- Comment #9 from Will Wray ---
An earlier draft had __builtin_tuple_size as the magic behind the P2141
proposed std::tuple_size automagic generalization to Case 3 class types.
There was opposition to that name because it specifically doesn't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49973
--- Comment #23 from Lewis Hyatt ---
Fixed for GCC 11, may I ask someone please to close the PR?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95952
--- Comment #15 from Mikael Pettersson ---
(In reply to Will Schmidt from comment #14)
> (In reply to Will Schmidt from comment #13)
> > Created attachment 48871 [details]
> > proposed patch
> >
> > Attached patch appears sufficient to resolve t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86904
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lhyatt at gmail dot com
--- Comment #5 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86904
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96198
Bug ID: 96198
Summary: new test case libgomp.c/loop-21.c in r11-2077
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96198
Bill Seurer changed:
What|Removed |Added
Build||powerpc64*-linux-gnu
Host|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95952
--- Comment #16 from Will Schmidt ---
(In reply to Mikael Pettersson from comment #15)
> (In reply to Will Schmidt from comment #14)
> > (In reply to Will Schmidt from comment #13)
> > > Created attachment 48871 [details]
> > > proposed patch
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94954
Will Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94954
Will Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED
--- Comment #7 from Will Schmidt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96143
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Ian Lance Taylor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bae45b8be57b2a2c22bf45f3eeb1118c328ad028
commit r11-2093-gbae45b8be57b2a2c22bf45f3eeb1118c328ad028
Author: Ian Lance Taylor
Date
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96198
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96143
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96193
--- Comment #3 from Johel Ernesto Guerrero Peña ---
Yes! I left it out expecting it to be backported as an extension like Clang
does.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49973
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96146
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b9475357b5b180c63b3389742452a48026f073a6
commit r10-8494-gb9475357b5b180c63b3389742452a48026f073a6
Author: Richard Sand
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95114
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:74d4c8bda2998e32e6c3b397cc61eadb4b208f0b
commit r10-8495-g74d4c8bda2998e32e6c3b397cc61eadb4b208f0b
Author: Richard Sand
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96191
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Wil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96198
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I think
--- gcc/omp-general.c.jj2020-07-14 12:20:01.520110629 +0200
+++ gcc/omp-general.c 2020-07-14 20:54:48.104237522 +0200
@@ -726,7 +726,7 @@ omp_extract_for_data (gomp_for *for_stmt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95443
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-07-14
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95151
Bug 95151 depends on bug 95443, which changed state.
Bug 95443 Summary: cmpstrnqi patterns update string length
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95443
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94415
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94404
Bug 94404 depends on bug 94415, which changed state.
Bug 94415 Summary: Implement DR 2237: Can a template-id name a constructor?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94415
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88475
Ryan Egesdahl changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ryan.egesdahl at mongodb dot
com
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96104
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8e64d182850560dbedfabb88aac90d4fc6155067
commit r11-2097-g8e64d182850560dbedfabb88aac90d4fc6155067
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96179
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8e64d182850560dbedfabb88aac90d4fc6155067
commit r11-2097-g8e64d182850560dbedfabb88aac90d4fc6155067
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95789
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8e64d182850560dbedfabb88aac90d4fc6155067
commit r11-2097-g8e64d182850560dbedfabb88aac90d4fc6155067
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89417
--- Comment #3 from Federico Kircheis ---
Thank you for the analysis, explanation and references, I did not think about
testing std::lock directly.
I'm still unsure if that means that it is a bug in valgrind, unfortunately I do
not know other 3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95434
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95443
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b2984e5ada65f417e8704d2e1e81ccd0272b5eb3
commit r11-2098-gb2984e5ada65f417e8704d2e1e81ccd0272b5eb3
Author: H.J. Lu
Date: Tue Jul 14 14:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96199
Bug ID: 96199
Summary: internal compiler error: in tsubst_copy with CTAD for
alias templates
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95151
Bug 95151 depends on bug 95443, which changed state.
Bug 95443 Summary: cmpstrnqi patterns update string length
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95443
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96199
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|internal compiler error: in |[10/11 Regression] internal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95443
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|REOPENED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89574
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |anlauf at gcc dot
gnu.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96199
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
We're reaching tsubst_copy/CONST_DECL:
/* We didn't find the name. That should never happen; if
name-lookup found it during preliminary parsing, we
should find it again h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96200
Bug ID: 96200
Summary: Implement __builtin_thread_pointer() and
__builtin_set_thread_pointer() if TLS is supported
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89574
--- Comment #10 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2020-July/054744.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59978
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4358099049cbb8180c5354c6754b04ff0b330835
commit r11-2099-g4358099049cbb8180c5354c6754b04ff0b330835
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Tu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59978
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
1 - 100 of 123 matches
Mail list logo
