[Bug c++/86465] New: C++17 triggers: ‘’ may be used uninitialized in this function

Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: proski at gnu dot org Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 44378 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44378&action=edit Preprocessed test case The attached file t

[Bug c++/81513] __has_cpp_attribute returns non-zero in C++03 mode, but attributes don't work

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81513 Pavel Roskin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/81513] New: __has_cpp_attribute returns non-zero in C++03 mode, but attributes don't work

erity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: proski at gnu dot org Target Milestone: --- Following compiles with "g++ -Wall -std=c++03 test.cpp -o test" and outputs "200809 201603 199711" #in

[Bug c++/81513] __has_cpp_attribute returns non-zero in C++03 mode, but attributes don't work

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81513 --- Comment #2 from Pavel Roskin --- __has_cpp_attribute is not supposed to check if the functionality is available somehow using some other approaches and keywords. It is supposed to check if the functionality is available as an attribute. Even

[Bug c++/85101] New: C++17 ICE in build_over_call, at cp/call.c:8149

: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: proski at gnu dot org Target Milestone: --- Today's gcc source from git. C++17 and C++2a are affected, C++14 is not. I was able to compile that code with the latest (at the time) gcc snapshot about a month ago, so

[Bug c++/85101] C++17 ICE in build_over_call, at cp/call.c:8149

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85101 --- Comment #1 from Pavel Roskin --- Created attachment 43779 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43779&action=edit Preprocessed source

[Bug c++/85092] [8 Regression] ICE under -std=gnu++1z in build_over_call under, at cp/call.c:8149

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85092 Pavel Roskin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||proski at gnu dot org --- Comment #1

[Bug c++/85092] [8 Regression] ICE under -std=gnu++1z in build_over_call under, at cp/call.c:8149

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85092 --- Comment #7 from Pavel Roskin --- I confirm that the issue has been fixed in the project I'm working on. Thank you!

[Bug c++/87897] [9 Regression] ICE in maybe_constant_value, at cp/constexpr.c:5255 since r265788

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87897 Pavel Roskin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||proski at gnu dot org --- Comment #3

[Bug c++/85569] [8 Regression] is_invocable(F, decltype(objs)...) fails with "not supported by dump_expr#" unless via indirection

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85569 Pavel Roskin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||proski at gnu dot org --- Comment #11

[Bug c++/88528] New: Regression in gcc 7.4

: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: proski at gnu dot org Target Milestone: --- gcc 7.4.0 fails to compile some code that could be compiled with earlier version of gcc 7.x. I don't see that issue with gcc 4.9.4, 5.5.0, 6.5.0 and 8.1.0. The issue still exists with the current

[Bug c++/88528] ICE with templated operator bool() in gcc 7

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88528 Pavel Roskin changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Regression in gcc 7.4 |ICE with templated operator

[Bug c++/88528] [7 Regression] ICE with templated operator bool() in gcc 7

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88528 --- Comment #3 from Pavel Roskin --- I ran "git bisect" between gcc 7.1.0 (affected) and gcc 8.1.0 (unaffected). Following commit fixed the issue: https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/commit/e0ccd4807edc919735b4d86590b5a9def529f91c 2018-04-11 Mar

[Bug c++/88528] [7 Regression] ICE with templated operator bool() in gcc 7

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88528 --- Comment #4 from Pavel Roskin --- The trivial backport of PR c++/85032 fixes both my testcase and the original issue with my code. Please include the fix in gcc 7.5.

[Bug c++/88664] False positive -Waddress-of-packed-member

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88664 Pavel Roskin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||proski at gnu dot org --- Comment #2

[Bug c++/92590] New: Cannot expose protected default constructor with "using" keyword in gcc 10

Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: proski at gnu dot org Target Milestone: --- This code fails to compile with the current gcc (commit d9be9f34fbb018c448dc5a02aaa95d6a6932135c) class Base {

[Bug c++/53239] New: [4.7 Regression] -ftree-vrp breaks min()

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53239 Bug #: 53239 Summary: [4.7 Regression] -ftree-vrp breaks min() Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority:

[Bug c++/53239] [4.7 Regression] -ftree-vrp breaks min()

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53239 --- Comment #1 from proski at gnu dot org 2012-05-04 21:43:11 UTC --- Created attachment 27310 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27310 Example (made on i386) This line is miscompiled: next = min (next, it->pending_

[Bug middle-end/53239] [4.7 Regression] VRP vs named value return opt

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53239 --- Comment #6 from proski at gnu dot org 2012-05-07 02:50:04 UTC --- Created attachment 27330 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27330 Self-contained test case Run the "compile" script. The output would be: return

[Bug tree-optimization/53239] [4.7 Regression] VRP vs named value return opt

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53239 --- Comment #10 from proski at gnu dot org 2012-05-07 12:35:40 UTC --- I applied the patch to gcc 4.7.0 and tested it with my example and GNU Lilypond. Both are fixed. Thanks!

[Bug c++/92590] [10 Regression] Cannot expose protected default constructor with "using" keyword in gcc 10

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92590 --- Comment #5 from Pavel Roskin --- Confirming fix on the original code. Thank you!

[Bug c++/86465] C++17 triggers: ‘’ may be used uninitialized in this function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86465 --- Comment #2 from Pavel Roskin --- Created attachment 44761 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44761&action=edit Heavily simplified example, g++-5 compatible I'm attaching a dumbed down version of the previous example, which

[Bug c++/86465] C++17 triggers: ‘’ may be used uninitialized in this function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86465 --- Comment #3 from Pavel Roskin --- Created attachment 44770 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44770&action=edit Futher reduced example I was able to reduce the example to just 55 lines, removing almost all the code that came