https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99590
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE when pack expansion |9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80053
--- Comment #14 from Richard Biener ---
I think the original asm goto case clearly remains and this is a difficult to
handle case since the label address only appears as regular input and the
goto target is statically represented in the CFG. The
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101546
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED
Ever confirmed|1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101546
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Host||x86_64-w64-mingw32
--- Comment #5 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22149
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||oschmidt_do_not_send_email_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43465
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|i686-pc-linux-gnu |
Build|i686-pc-linux-gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86605
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97191
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||16994
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96862
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||glisse at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91099
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96781
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69698
Bug 69698 depends on bug 96743, which changed state.
Bug 96743 Summary: ICE on flexible array in initializer list using lambdas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96743
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54367
Bug 54367 depends on bug 96743, which changed state.
Bug 96743 Summary: ICE on flexible array in initializer list using lambdas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96743
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96743
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.4
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96636
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
--- Comment #3 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96636
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.1.2
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87616
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Michael Gorbovitski from comment #2)
> Slightly simplified test case (no need for double-argument template):
here is one which is valid C++98 which shows even GCC 4.1.2 has the same ICE
struct fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87616
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tangyixuan at mail dot
dlut.edu.cn
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96656
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2020-08-18 00:00:00 |2021-7-26
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96553
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96552
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96400
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96359
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101596
--- Comment #3 from Kewen Lin ---
Formal patch has been posted at
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-July/576071.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27775
--- Comment #5 from Rich Newman ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #4)
> Clang 3.0 also reject this, so I am not sure whether is actually valid, but
> the repeated messages are suspicious.
>
EDG accepts it, and I can see nothing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24568
Tobias Schlüter changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101631
--- Comment #2 from fsb4000 at yandex dot ru ---
Sure.
$ g++ -c -std=c++20 -save-temps main.cpp
$ g++ -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=C:\tools\msys64\mingw64\bin\g++.exe
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=C:/tools/msys64/mingw64/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-w64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44282
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ondrej.kolacek at centrum dot
cz
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57227
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57136
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
clang started to accept this code in clang 10.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43189
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100170
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Michael Meissner :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5485e820cd0554886af282265198c7433c64c7b9
commit r12-2521-g5485e820cd0554886af282265198c7433c64c7b9
Author: Michael Meissner
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52761
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
clang declared this as a GNU extention :)
:2:6: error: redeclaration of already-defined enum 'E' is a GNU
extension [-Werror,-Wgnu-redeclared-enum]
enum E; // illegal
^
:1:6: note: previous definition i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52618
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24926
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kuba at et dot pl
--- Comment #7 from An
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51716
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55436
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101626
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |tree-optimization
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84431
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fuz at fuz dot su
--- Comment #9 from An
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24568
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2008-11-22 10:41:24 |2021-7-26
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19466
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71461
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2016-06-09 00:00:00 |2021-7-26
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67510
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70782
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-07-26
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Andrew Macleod :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d5a8c1382718ae084d46ff9b8a26d6b1d0cb684c
commit r12-2519-gd5a8c1382718ae084d46ff9b8a26d6b1d0cb684c
Author: Andrew MacLeod
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68136
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2015-10-28 00:00:00 |2021-7-26
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48297
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2011-03-28 09:34:02 |2021-7-26
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63525
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11877
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32629
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56924
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57186
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60826
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56369
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56711
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78103
--- Comment #15 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #14)
> (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #13)
> > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10)
> > > Unfortunately, it doesn't work for the #c0 testcas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56610
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||12.0
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78103
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #13)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10)
> > Unfortunately, it doesn't work for the #c0 testcase, after the combiner
> > splitter kicks in, the combine
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54802
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
In GCC 5+, we are able to figure out both do bswap.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78103
--- Comment #13 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10)
> Unfortunately, it doesn't work for the #c0 testcase, after the combiner
> splitter kicks in, the combiner doesn't even try that 4 insn combination.
It do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50272
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
In GCC 5+ we can get rid of the loop fully (in the reduced testcase).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34417
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2007-12-10 13:40:29 |2021-7-26
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101631
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30101
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38209
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39744
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Confirmed again:
Before FRE:
z = 1;
_4 = MEM[(struct X *)&z].y.z;
Note fre we are able to do the right thing but dom does not.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52070
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2012-02-01 00:00:00 |2021-7-26
Component|tree-optimi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34011
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski ---
good function:
.L3:
movdqu (%rdi,%rax), %xmm0
pslld %xmm1, %xmm0
movups %xmm0, (%rsi,%rax)
addq$16, %rax
cmpq$1024, %rax
jne .L3
bad function:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15533
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
This looks improved in GCC 4.4.7 and above:
fn(unsigned short):
movzbl a, %edx
xorb%al, %al
orl %edx, %eax
ret
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51084
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2012-01-07 00:00:00 |2021-7-26
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14842
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24696
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26656
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |target
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101632
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 51207
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51207&action=edit
Diff that implements F2018 NON_RECURSIVE and makes things recursive by default.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101632
--- Comment #1 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
F2018 introduced the NON_RECURSIVE prefix for procedures and also made
procedures recursive by default. This code is conforming to F2018.
module bah
contains
!
! non_recursive is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50286
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2011-12-14 00:00:00 |2021-7-26
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101632
Bug ID: 101632
Summary: NON_RECURSIVE procedure prefix is unsupported. F2018
defaults to recursive procedures.
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11877
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jeffreyalaw at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41505
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11877
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msharov at users dot
sourceforge.n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49127
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101631
Bug ID: 101631
Summary: gcc permits object reference to object outside of its
lifetime during constant evaluation
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101628
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Related to PR 62661 which was closed as invalid.
Basically the C++ standard says the tokens inside the #if blocks need to be
valid tokens still.
version 12.0.0 20210726 (experimental) [master revision
:c09cf6429:124bb55777c280a85d0c72ec13e293a32917a6b9] (GCC)
$ cat mutant.c
printf(char[][], ...) { printf(printf); }
$ gcc-trunk -Wall mutant.c
mutant.c:1:12: error: array type has incomplete element type ‘char[]’
1 | printf(char
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7
Andrew Macleod changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Andrew Macleod :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1ce0b26e6e1e6c348b1d54f1f462a44df6fe47f5
commit r12-2517-g1ce0b26e6e1e6c348b1d54f1f462a44df6fe47f5
Author: Andrew MacLeod
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101629
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101629
Bug ID: 101629
Summary: ICE: in cp_finish_decl, at cp/decl.c:7826
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101628
Bug ID: 101628
Summary: Preprocessor errors on extended characters in #if 0
code block
Product: gcc
Version: 10.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101627
Bug ID: 101627
Summary: List-directed read with trailing characters after
quotes
Product: gcc
Version: 11.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101626
Bug ID: 101626
Summary: [12 Regression] ICE in verify_sra_access_forest, at
tree-sra.c:2376
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100440
--- Comment #13 from David.Smith at lmu dot edu ---
Thanks for working on the bug I reported in May.
I am hoping you can give me some information that I can pass on to
the users of my open-source software who use gfortran to run it.
Can you est
nfigure --prefix=/home/tonyb/tmp/gcc/install
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 11.1.1 20210726 (GCC)
gcc -std=gnu99 -Os -m32 -Wall -W -Wshadow -Wpointer-arith -Wundef
-Wchar-subscripts -Wcomment -Wdeprecated-declarations -Wdisabled-optimization
-Wdiv-by-zero
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101624
Bug ID: 101624
Summary: [9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected tree
that contains 'decl with RTL' structure, have
'const_decl' in maybe_optimize_ubsan_ptr_ifn, at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92713
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus ---
"ICE in libsupc++ building an offload compiler targeting amdgcn-unknown-amdhsa"
(Subject)
I wonder whether that ICE is just because of the lack of exception support and
whether it might work when using -fn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101447
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bf6d414415e14e13be16abf23375160733567d20
commit r12-2512-gbf6d414415e14e13be16abf23375160733567d20
Author: Ashimida
Date: Mon Jul 26
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101611
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
That is true, but I think even for vector >> scalar and scalar >> scalar shifts
it will be quite rare to support logical and not support arithmetic shifts.
And on x86, as can be seen in the PR98856 changes,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101611
--- Comment #7 from Marc Glisse ---
The same strategy to implement arithmetic shift in terms of logical shift works
not just for vector>>vector but also vector>>scalar and scalar>>scalar. But it
is probably not worth the trouble indeed, especial
1 - 100 of 132 matches
Mail list logo
