https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116710
Bug ID: 116710
Summary: Deduction succeeds despite mismatch of reference kind
(lvalue versus rvalue)
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116063
--- Comment #2 from Hubert Tong ---
If it is invalid, a diagnostic like this should appear:
```
warning: union cannot be made transparent
```
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116063
Bug ID: 116063
Summary: [PPC] Transparent union issue with signedness when
optimizing
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116011
--- Comment #10 from Hubert Tong ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #9)
> (In reply to Hubert Tong from comment #8)
> > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #7)
> > > Those are all unevulated context.that is sizeof and decltype are b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116011
--- Comment #8 from Hubert Tong ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #7)
> Those are all unevulated context.that is sizeof and decltype are both
> considered unevulated context. In them, gcc does not think &(T::x) and &T::x
> act differen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116011
Hubert Tong changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|accepting &(T::x) as a |Template declaration
|p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116011
--- Comment #4 from Hubert Tong ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> The reality of the issue comes down to accepting this:
> ```
> struct foo { int val; };
>
> int main() { decltype(&(foo::val)) ptr; }
> ```
Yes, which was added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116011
--- Comment #2 from Hubert Tong ---
The fix for Clang is in the works:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/89713#issuecomment-2240767267
An issue has been filed against the Itanium ABI:
https://github.com/itanium-cxx-abi/cxx-abi/issues/18
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116011
Bug ID: 116011
Summary: Bogus template redefinition error between
pointer-to-member &T::x versus pointer &(T::x)
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115604
Bug ID: 115604
Summary: Absurd "flows off the end of the function" diagnostic
with requires expression containing lambda
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115171
Bug ID: 115171
Summary: Constant evaluation of math.h functions in C++ against
constexpr.functions
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: acc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49395
Hubert Tong changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|SUSPENDED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107962
--- Comment #2 from Hubert Tong ---
https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_active.html#2264 suggests that
the GCC behaviour may be the desired one because copies of
partially-initialized structures are allowed in C but cause undefined
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108324
Bug ID: 108324
Summary: Temporary not bound to reference in default member
initializer destroyed early from parenthesized
expression-list initialization of aggregate
Produc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107962
Bug ID: 107962
Summary: GCC allows constexpr copy construction despite
uninitialized member
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: accepts-in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102000
Hubert Tong changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hstong at ca dot ibm.com
--- Comment #4 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105934
Bug ID: 105934
Summary: [9/10/11/12/13 Regression] C++11 pointer versions of
atomic_fetch_add missing because of P0558
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105588
--- Comment #4 from Hubert Tong ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> _Alignof(expression) works like __alignof__(expression) which works like
> __alignof__(__typeof(expression)), while _Alignof(type_name) is mandated by
> the standa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105588
--- Comment #2 from Hubert Tong ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> _Alignof(expression) is still an extension it can return what ever GCC
> decides
Sure, although why GCC should have corresponding C and C++ extensions that
b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105588
Bug ID: 105588
Summary: _Alignof (C) and alignof (C++) on dereference of
`double *` disagree on 32-bit x86
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105290
Bug ID: 105290
Summary: "Purely syntactic" disambiguation but GCC applies
semantic rules for constant expressions
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104994
Bug ID: 104994
Summary: extern thread_local declaration rejected in constexpr
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-valid
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100641
Hubert Tong changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hstong at ca dot ibm.com
--- Comment #2 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103060
Bug ID: 103060
Summary: Argument initialization side-effects missing:
delegating from base constructor to inherited
constructor from virtual base
Product: gcc
Ve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92060
--- Comment #3 from Hubert Tong ---
(In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #2)
> Hmm, I think treating A and Q as equivalent here is allowed by CWG 1286.
Looks like it; CWG 1286 as not been adopted by the committee though.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97219
Bug ID: 97219
Summary: Generic lambda does not find function declaration from
enclosing block scope
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: acc
26 matches
Mail list logo
