[Bug c++/107128] armhf: floatn-common.h:214:9: error: multiple types in one declaration

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107128 --- Comment #7 from Mike Hommey --- Forget my last comment, it came from the use of a sysroot with an older glibc. I wonder why the sysroot path didn't appear in those messages...

[Bug c++/107128] armhf: floatn-common.h:214:9: error: multiple types in one declaration

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107128 Mike Hommey changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mh+gcc at glandium dot org --- Comment #6

[Bug other/107694] New: Bogus stringop-overflow warning in gcc 12

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107694 Bug ID: 107694 Summary: Bogus stringop-overflow warning in gcc 12 Product: gcc Version: 12.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: othe

[Bug c++/106633] Hidden visibility on forward declarations impacts visibility of default-visibility class methods

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106633 Mike Hommey changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/106633] New: Hidden visibility on forward declarations impacts visibility of default-visibility class methods

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106633 Bug ID: 106633 Summary: Hidden visibility on forward declarations impacts visibility of default-visibility class methods Product: gcc Version: 12.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/104142] [9/10/11 Regression] Spurious warning unused-variable on const static variable and defaulted constructor

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104142 --- Comment #7 from Mike Hommey --- (In reply to Mike Hommey from comment #6) > There's a different warning that interestingly only happens on 11.2 and 11.3 > (not 11.1 or earlier versions), that is fixed by the patch in this bug: Forgot to men

[Bug c++/104142] [9/10/11 Regression] Spurious warning unused-variable on const static variable and defaulted constructor

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104142 Mike Hommey changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mh+gcc at glandium dot org --- Comment #6

[Bug c++/100666] New: warning: ignoring return value of 'constexpr _Tp&& std::forward(typename std::remove_reference<_Tp>::type&) [with _Tp = std::nullptr_t; typename std::remove_reference<_Tp>::type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100666 Bug ID: 100666 Summary: warning: ignoring return value of 'constexpr _Tp&& std::forward(typename std::remove_reference<_Tp>::type&) [with _Tp = std::nullptr_t; typ

[Bug ipa/99785] Awful lot of time spent building gl.cc in Firefox

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99785 --- Comment #7 from Mike Hommey --- It's worth noting that the clang variant of the code makes use of __builtin_shufflevector, which the gcc variant doesn't (per https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/source/gfx/wr/swgl/src/vector_type.h), so the

[Bug ipa/99785] Awful lot of time spent building gl.cc in Firefox

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99785 --- Comment #6 from Mike Hommey --- Replacing __attribute__((always_inline)) with inline on the two blend_pixels functions makes it go down to 30s with GCC 10. See https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1700520#c9 why the functions were ma

[Bug ipa/99785] Awful lot of time spent building gl.cc in Firefox

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99785 --- Comment #4 from Mike Hommey --- GCC 11 is the package in Debian experimental, so however it's built.

[Bug c++/99785] New: Awful lot of time spent building gl.cc in Firefox

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99785 Bug ID: 99785 Summary: Awful lot of time spent building gl.cc in Firefox Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Componen

[Bug c/99784] `labels as values`can point to the wrong spot after optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99784 --- Comment #3 from Mike Hommey --- PR 96956 only really talks about this: "You may not use this mechanism to jump to code in a different function. If you do that, totally unpredictable things happen.". My testcase doesn't involve jumping to the

[Bug c/99784] `labels as values`can point to the wrong spot after optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99784 --- Comment #1 from Mike Hommey --- This is reproducible with all versions of GCC on godbolt, including trunk.

[Bug c/99784] New: `labels as values`can point to the wrong spot after optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99784 Bug ID: 99784 Summary: `labels as values`can point to the wrong spot after optimization Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal