https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97619
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97452
--- Comment #4 from David Ledger ---
@Iain Sandoe
In terms of the standard do you think this is technically undefined behaviour?
I tried bring this up with Std-Proposals but got no response at all.
I believe either I'm very bad at writing (likel
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96504
Rimvydas (RJ) changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rimvydas.jas at gmail dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97417
Levy changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||admin at levyhsu dot com
--- Comment #6 from Levy
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97623
--- Comment #1 from Wilson Snyder ---
P.S. Note gcc -v and related information are comments at top of the attachment.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97609
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Andrew Macleod :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0162d00d12be24ee3f02ce876adafeaa91c6f7f9
commit r11-4515-g0162d00d12be24ee3f02ce876adafeaa91c6f7f9
Author: Andrew MacLeod
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97623
Bug ID: 97623
Summary: Extremely slow O2 compile (>>O(n^2))
Product: gcc
Version: 9.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97090
--- Comment #8 from David Malcolm ---
I tested with a cross build on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu with
target==powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu after various fixes for non-determinism
(g:f635f0ce87d687b177b734968f18226d50499e75) and I'm not seeing the bogus
di
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97622
Bug ID: 97622
Summary: ubsan ' unterminated quote character ''' in format
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97608
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97620
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor ---
I don't know of any such macros and -dM -E doesn't show any.
Bug 82700 comment 1 explains that "The sprintf pass calls
lang_hooks.to_target_charset () to convert each of these characters from the
source set t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97608
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1a9af271275f4893e28c789c8f1964025694eda1
commit r11-4510-g1a9af271275f4893e28c789c8f1964025694eda1
Author: David Malcolm
Date: We
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97550
--- Comment #2 from fdlbxtqi ---
cp/cp-lang.o c-family/stub-objc.o cp/call.o cp/class.o cp/constexpr.o
cp/constraint.o cp/coroutines.o cp/cp-gimplify.o cp/cp-objcp-common.o
cp/cp-ubsan.o cp/cvt.o cp/cxx-pretty-print.o cp/decl.o cp/decl2.o c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60630
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97573
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:455ade18462e5076065b1970e21c622239797392
commit r11-4502-g455ade18462e5076065b1970e21c622239797392
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Tu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95132
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96742
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[10/11 Regression] |[10 Regression] "warning:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96675
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[10/11 Regression] |[10 Regression]
|tauto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96742
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:976e7ef1a2d54f46021f74d071d9fdb9631298f8
commit r11-4501-g976e7ef1a2d54f46021f74d071d9fdb9631298f8
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Sa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96675
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:976e7ef1a2d54f46021f74d071d9fdb9631298f8
commit r11-4501-g976e7ef1a2d54f46021f74d071d9fdb9631298f8
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Sa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95132
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:833b180f097e8bae44634e6a31e9c92d661af301
commit r10-8951-g833b180f097e8bae44634e6a31e9c92d661af301
Author: Patrick Palka
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30802
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97609
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Macleod ---
Created attachment 49460
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49460&action=edit
call infer_non_null directly
Looking closer at the non-null deref calls, the problem was deep in
stmt_ends_bb_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96608
--- Comment #14 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #7)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
> > What I mean is if you ever traversing a hashtable, the hash should not use
> > the value of a pointer because it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96608
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96608
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||brechtsanders at users dot
sourcef
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97614
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97411
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97090
--- Comment #7 from David Malcolm ---
*** Bug 97411 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97090
--- Comment #6 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #1)
> I see random results from one run to another, so it's likely that something
> is not initialized correctly.
I think it's due to places in -fanalyzer that iterat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97090
--- Comment #5 from David Malcolm ---
PR 97621 reports it as starting on powerpc64*-linux-gnu with r11-4434, which
was a fix for non-determinism in -fanalyzer, so perhaps this is a flaky test
that the non-determinism fixes have made fail more rel
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97090
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||seurer at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97621
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82359
Aaron Ballman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aaron at aaronballman dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97411
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
Looks like a dup of PR 97090 (though that one is on arm).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97608
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94799
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94799
--- Comment #16 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:323dd4255203479d8c456b85513db4f8e0041d04
commit r11-4499-g323dd4255203479d8c456b85513db4f8e0041d04
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86773
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86773
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:43cb72263fb3b7b97a74fb38d71364a1d5cf0448
commit r11-4498-g43cb72263fb3b7b97a74fb38d71364a1d5cf0448
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97620
--- Comment #3 from fdlbxtqi ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #2)
> This is almost certainly caused by an incomplete charset, same as in pr82700.
>
> *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 82700 ***
Then provide a better e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97535
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tamar Christina :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3dcd47389b16f48dcf5512b9ebba15af5c0be948
commit r11-4496-g3dcd47389b16f48dcf5512b9ebba15af5c0be948
Author: Tamar Christina
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97609
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Macleod ---
This worked OK because the code does:
/* Replace real uses in the statement. */
did_replace |= substitute_and_fold_engine->replace_uses_in (stmt);
gimple_stmt_iterator prev_gsi = i;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97620
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Assignee|dmalcolm at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82700
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||euloanty at live dot com
--- Comment #4 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97457
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:54ef7701a9dec8c923a12d1983f8a051ba88a7b9
commit r11-4495-g54ef7701a9dec8c923a12d1983f8a051ba88a7b9
Author: Richard Sandiford
Da
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97620
--- Comment #1 from fdlbxtqi ---
Program:
#include
int main()
{
printf("Hello World %d\n",6);
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97621
Bug ID: 97621
Summary: [11 regression] bogus message in
gcc.dg/analyzer/malloc-vs-local-1b.c after r11-4434
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97620
Bug ID: 97620
Summary: -fexec-charset=IBM16804 triggers ICE
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: analyzer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97205
--- Comment #9 from Bernd Edlinger ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #7)
> On Wed, 28 Oct 2020, bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot de wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97205
> >
> > --- Comment #6 from Bernd Edl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97619
--- Comment #1 from David Binderman ---
Reduced code is:
char a;
char *b;
int c;
void f(void)
{
char *d = f;
int e;
for(;e;e++)
{
d[4*e] = a*(256-c) + b[4*e]*c >> 8;
d[4*e+1] = a*(
unk and compiler
flag -O3, does this:
/home/dcb/gcc/results.20201027/bin/gcc
/home/dcb/gcc/results.20201028/bin/gcc
resample.c: In function ‘merge_linear_argb_ref’:
resample.c:163:1: error: true/false edge after a non-GIMPLE_COND in bb 4
resample.c:163:1: error: true/false edge after a non-GIMPLE_CON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97600
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96217
--- Comment #8 from LE GARREC Vincent ---
Thanks, you're right. I was able to build with
CFLAGS="-march=native -ggdb2 -g2 -pipe -fno-omit-frame-pointer -O0"
CXXFLAGS="-march=native -ggdb2 -g2 -pipe -fno-omit-frame-pointer -O0"
but with adding :
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97609
--- Comment #3 from Aldy Hernandez ---
And the reason this was working before is two-fold.
First, value_of_expr() in legacy evrp won't look at broken gimple, so the
request for __keep_12(D) in the following statement actually succeeds:
__to_d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97613
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97613
--- Comment #3 from Patrick Palka ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8572edc828f6d1e7c8243f901fe7c96f62a11a8e
commit r11-4490-g8572edc828f6d1e7c8243f901fe7c96f62a11a8e
Author: Patrick Palka
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97609
--- Comment #2 from Aldy Hernandez ---
tl;dr: substitute_and_fold_engine::replace_uses_in() creates invalid gimple, so
when its loop goes on to request a range (value_of_expr), the ranger may see
invalid IL and die an ungraceful death.
The long
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96713
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96713
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8572edc828f6d1e7c8243f901fe7c96f62a11a8e
commit r11-4490-g8572edc828f6d1e7c8243f901fe7c96f62a11a8e
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: We
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86769
Arthur O'Dwyer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arthur.j.odwyer at gmail dot
com
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97618
--- Comment #2 from Brecht Sanders
---
To build mpfr wich fails with:
build_mingw\i686-w64-mingw32\libgcc/../../../libgcc/config/libbid/bid128_div.c:1523:
undefined reference to `LC4'
I figured out that the symbol LC4 is defined in libgcc.a, so
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95132
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9ccc3495766116ea4ae8e4cd8129beca60e30445
commit r11-4488-g9ccc3495766116ea4ae8e4cd8129beca60e30445
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: We
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87404
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86769
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc-bugzilla at contacts dot
eelis
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68003
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68003
Arthur O'Dwyer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arthur.j.odwyer at gmail dot
com
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65113
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45821
Philip R Brenan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||philiprbrenan at gmail dot com
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60630
--- Comment #2 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
My hpux11.00 machine died some years ago.
On hpux11.11, the only non prettyprinter fail is:
FAIL: 26_numerics/complex/proj.cc execution test
The prettyprinter tests all fail due to a perl issu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97618
--- Comment #1 from Brecht Sanders
---
I see a similar issue when building mpfr with the resulting compiler, but here
the error is:
build_mingw\i686-w64-mingw32\libgcc/../../../libgcc/config/libbid/bid128_div.c:616:
undefined reference to `LC4'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95609
--- Comment #6 from Niall Douglas ---
Cool, thanks. I believe that all three major STLs now implement struct iovec
compatibility with span. That's a nice win.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97616
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97615
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97615
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b626b00823af9ca9ab619fe13d1e8703a3101dab
commit r11-4482-gb626b00823af9ca9ab619fe13d1e8703a3101dab
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60630
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-10-28
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65114
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |SUSPENDED
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96331
Pilar Latiesa changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pilarlatiesa at gmail dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97618
Bug ID: 97618
Summary: undefined reference to LC11 building for target
MinGW-w64 32-bit
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97613
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97596
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Macleod ---
This should be fixed with:
commit 279a9ce9d545f65a0bb1bc4564abafabfc25f82d
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Wed Oct 28 10:24:20 2020 +0100
wide-int: Fix up set_bit_large
> >> wide_int new_lb = wi::s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97362
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8/9/10/11 Regression] |[8/9/10 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94268
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94268
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0bc199fc5d4eef5a20ced20df892e5e3b8821b60
commit r11-4479-g0bc199fc5d4eef5a20ced20df892e5e3b8821b60
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92124
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arthur.j.odwyer at gmail dot
com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89610
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97617
--- Comment #3 from Jan Smets ---
Sorry, I was too quickly in my wording to "skip single_exit()", of course that
edge is still required.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97617
--- Comment #2 from Jan Smets ---
Is it maybe a possibility to report the (possible) false positives with
something like -Waggressive-loop-optimizations=2 ?
Would that only require a skip of single_exit() in
do_warn_aggressive_loop_optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95557
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95567
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95592
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95592
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:72a87d82e0d0741d75c72c8f3d2fc070e3a02b5f
commit r11-4476-g72a87d82e0d0741d75c72c8f3d2fc070e3a02b5f
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95609
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95609
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0f7cd5e5735e5536bf7bc8ca2b998f7ce8b4ddee
commit r11-4475-g0f7cd5e5735e5536bf7bc8ca2b998f7ce8b4ddee
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97616
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97615
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97323
Maxim Kuvyrkov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mkuvyrkov at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97617
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97497
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever confirme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97617
Bug ID: 97617
Summary: missing aggressive loop optimization warning in C++
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
1 - 100 of 137 matches
Mail list logo
