[Bug libstdc++/63400] [C++11]precision of std::chrono::high_resolution_clock

2024-03-08 Thread vz-gcc at zeitlins dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63400 --- Comment #13 from Vadim Zeitlin --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #11) > (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #8) > > Is this still an issue in 2022? > > > > Using a mingw-w64 cross-compiler and running under Wine I get: > >

[Bug libstdc++/63400] [C++11]precision of std::chrono::high_resolution_clock

2024-03-08 Thread vz-gcc at zeitlins dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63400 --- Comment #16 from Vadim Zeitlin --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #15) > (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #14) > > Or maybe the testcase makes invalid assumptions and isn't really measuring > > what it thinks it's measurin

[Bug c++/106434] New: Spurious -Wnull-dereference when using std::unique_copy()

2022-07-25 Thread vz-gcc at zeitlins dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106434 Bug ID: 106434 Summary: Spurious -Wnull-dereference when using std::unique_copy() Product: gcc Version: 12.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal P

[Bug libstdc++/106664] std::valarray::resize(0): spurious -Walloc-zero warning

2022-08-17 Thread vz-gcc at zeitlins dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106664 --- Comment #2 from Vadim Zeitlin --- FWIW I think it's a rather useful warning as allocating 0 bytes is rarely intentional, i.e. I haven't seen any false positive occurrences of this warning in my own code. And in valarray case, it indicates a

[Bug c++/55578] Disabling warnings inside macro definition doesn't work

2022-10-04 Thread vz-gcc at zeitlins dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55578 --- Comment #10 from Vadim Zeitlin --- There definitely was a change in behaviour in gcc 11 because I had to make this change https://github.com/wxWidgets/wxWidgets/commit/95c98a0b5ff71caca6654327bf341719c6587766 to avoid getting warnings with

[Bug c++/55578] Disabling warnings inside macro definition doesn't work

2022-10-05 Thread vz-gcc at zeitlins dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55578 --- Comment #12 from Vadim Zeitlin --- Thanks for looking at this! I'm happy to hear that the problem is fixed in 11.2, but I'm probably not going to change our code anyhow, especially as we're going to finally drop support for C++98 very soon an

[Bug c++/55578] Disabling warnings inside macro definition doesn't work

2021-04-26 Thread vz-gcc at zeitlins dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55578 Vadim Zeitlin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vz-gcc at zeitlins dot org --- Comment #

[Bug c++/99234] New: Regression: wrong result for 1.0/3.0 when -fno-omit-frame-pointer -frounding-math used together

2021-02-23 Thread vz-gcc at zeitlins dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99234 Bug ID: 99234 Summary: Regression: wrong result for 1.0/3.0 when -fno-omit-frame-pointer -frounding-math used together Product: gcc Version: 10.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/99234] Regression: wrong result for 1.0/3.0 when -fno-omit-frame-pointer -frounding-math used together

2021-02-24 Thread vz-gcc at zeitlins dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99234 --- Comment #2 from Vadim Zeitlin --- Created attachment 50250 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50250&action=edit Compressed output of the preprocessor (-E)

[Bug target/99234] Regression: wrong result for 1.0/3.0 when -fno-omit-frame-pointer -frounding-math used together

2021-02-24 Thread vz-gcc at zeitlins dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99234 --- Comment #3 from Vadim Zeitlin --- Created attachment 50251 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50251&action=edit File created by -fdump-tree-optimized

[Bug target/99234] Regression: wrong result for 1.0/3.0 when -fno-omit-frame-pointer -frounding-math used together

2021-02-24 Thread vz-gcc at zeitlins dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99234 --- Comment #4 from Vadim Zeitlin --- Created attachment 50252 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50252&action=edit Assembly output (-S)

[Bug target/99234] Regression: wrong result for 1.0/3.0 when -fno-omit-frame-pointer -frounding-math used together

2021-02-24 Thread vz-gcc at zeitlins dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99234 --- Comment #5 from Vadim Zeitlin --- > Works fine on x86_64-linux. Yes, I mentioned this :-/ > Can you attach preprocessed source (most developers don't have access to > Windows) If you can install MinGW cross-compiler and Wine, you don't ne

[Bug target/99234] [10/11 regression] wrong result for 1.0/3.0 with -O2 -fno-omit-frame-pointer -frounding-math

2021-03-01 Thread vz-gcc at zeitlins dot org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99234 --- Comment #23 from Vadim Zeitlin --- (In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #22) > Thanks for reporting the problem. Thanks a lot for fixing it so quickly! And I've also appreciated the explanation in the commit message, it's nice to underst