https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=122088
--- Comment #1 from Xingbang He ---
Created attachment 62462
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=62462&action=edit
bug report by using -freport-bug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=122086
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99217
huangpei at loongson dot cn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|N
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78640
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2016-12-02 00:00:00 |2025-9-28
--- Comment #6 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=122085
Bug ID: 122085
Summary: Day_Of_Week returns wrong day
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ada
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=122086
Bug ID: 122086
Summary: [16 regression] gcc.target/riscv/cmo-zicboz-zic64-1.c
fails after r16-4081
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: mis
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121963
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Can you please fix your new blog post to not misattribute Nathaniel's comment
to me.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119256
James K. Lowden changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|WONTFIX |FIXED
--- Comment #6 from James K. Lo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121616
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121939
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108581
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121939
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-15 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:54c239848c9afa0291d4aaf6df9de0109ccd68fa
commit r15-10379-g54c239848c9afa0291d4aaf6df9de0109ccd68fa
Author: Harald Anlauf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121616
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-15 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9bfc496528d5e82e728cf07c9af69386083d252f
commit r15-10380-g9bfc496528d5e82e728cf07c9af69386083d252f
Author: Harald Anlauf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108581
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-15 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d7709c8366b59f556bd354dc63162c0f97172ab0
commit r15-10378-gd7709c8366b59f556bd354dc63162c0f97172ab0
Author: Harald Anlauf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78640
--- Comment #5 from Damian Rouson ---
LLVM flang also disallows the submitted code and here's a slightly shorter
reproducer that is also rejected by flang and nagfor but accepted by gfortran
and ifx:
implicit none
type foo_t
end type
con
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=122079
--- Comment #1 from Zhendong Su ---
Here is another test that fails at -O{s,2,3} and doesn't require the flag
-fno-tree-loop-im.
Compiler Explorer: https://godbolt.org/z/vfs1fdaas
[669] % gcctk -O3 small.c
during GIMPLE pass: pre
small.c: In
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121936
--- Comment #22 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #21)
> Second, the following optimism about inline functions seems to be
> wrong:
>
> /* Inline functions are safe to be analyzed even if their symbol can
> b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121936
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
St
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117576
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40770
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #27
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40770
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||blaffablaffa at gmail dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70901
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=122066
--- Comment #4 from Mikael Pettersson ---
Created attachment 62460
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=62460&action=edit
reduced test case
C-vise reduced test case, plain C, compile with -O2 or -Os
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82450
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2017-10-07 00:00:00 |2025-9-28
--- Comment #9 from Thomas Koe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=122070
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
25 matches
Mail list logo
