https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55978
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55978
--- Comment #30 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #29)
> + if (a->expr->expr_type == EXPR_NULL || a->expr->ts.type == BT_UNKNOWN)
> + goto skip_size_check;
Oops, that should read && instead of ||.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87448
--- Comment #5 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Paul Thomas from comment #4)
> Created attachment 56484 [details]
> Fix for this PR
>
> Somehow this missed being a blocker for the ASSOCIATE meta-bug.
>
> The patch is so unbelievab
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96580
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96580
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid, wrong-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96580
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |anlauf at gcc dot
gnu.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96584
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96585
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96580
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85836
Bug 85836 depends on bug 96580, which changed state.
Bug 96580 Summary: F2018 changes to date_and_time intrinsics
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96580
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81615
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81615
--- Comment #20 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #19)
> (In reply to anlauf from comment #18)
> > (In reply to Alex Coplan from comment #17)
> > > Just a ping: it would be nice if this could be fixed, I'm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113096
Bug ID: 113096
Summary: [F2023] Allow deferred-length character argument to
ERRMSG= specifier
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113096
--- Comment #1 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
A little further down in the standards document:
• Intrinsic procedures:
...
"When a deferred-length allocatable actual argument of an intrinsic procedure
is assigned character data, it is alloca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113118
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||14.0
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97592
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|11.5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81615
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113152
--- Comment #10 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to kargl from comment #0)
> Created attachment 56949 [details]
> patch with implementation
Not a review, just a comment:
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/simplify.cc b/gcc/fortran/simplify.cc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113245
Bug ID: 113245
Summary: SIZE with optional DIM argument that has the
OPTIONAL+VALUE attributes
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113245
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93948
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|WAIT
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67972
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|WAIT
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96724
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96724
--- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Submitted: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2024-January/060090.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96724
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113245
--- Comment #1 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The following probably rather obvious patch fixes the issue:
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/trans-intrinsic.cc b/gcc/fortran/trans-intrinsic.cc
index d973c49380c..748cc74de89 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113245
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-01-07
Assigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113245
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113305
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113305
--- Comment #6 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 57026
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57026&action=edit
Draft patch
Draft patch that passes annotations to DO CONCURRENT loops.
Needs testing and feedback
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113305
--- Comment #7 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Submitted: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2024-January/060110.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113338
--- Comment #1 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
NAG also rejects the code.
The code compiles with gfortran if one declares t interoperable:
type, bind(c) :: t
Note that F2008 still had:
"(5) any dummy argument without the VALUE attribute
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113338
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-01-12
Keyword
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113363
Bug ID: 113363
Summary: ICE on ASSOCIATE and unlimited polymorphic function
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113305
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113377
Bug ID: 113377
Summary: Wrong code passing optional dummy argument to
elemental procedure with optional dummy
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67277
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113305
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113377
--- Comment #2 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #1)
> (In reply to anlauf from comment #0)
> > The dump-tree suggests that the scalarizer sees the loop invariant j,
> > unconditionally dereferences it outs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113377
--- Comment #3 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 57108
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57108&action=edit
Patch to play with
This is a first attempt to outline code for handling scalar dummies with the
VAL
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113377
--- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #3)
> However,
>
> integer, allocatable,optional :: j
>
> still does not work: the code *in* the generated loop looks fine to me, but
> the scalarizer derefe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113471
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113471
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113471
--- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jürgen Reuter from comment #3)
> Thanks for the quick reaction, indeed with your fix, all our tests do work
> again when all check flags are switched on (we don't do it in our CI with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113503
--- Comment #1 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
When trying to further reduce the code I get either an ICE or an
uninitialized-warning for:
program xtb
implicit none
type :: TSolvInput
character(len=:), allocatable :: solvent
end ty
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113503
--- Comment #2 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #1)
> When trying to further reduce the code I get either an ICE or an
> uninitialized-warning for:
program xtb
implicit none
type :: TSolvInput
characte
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113377
--- Comment #7 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #6)
> (In reply to anlauf from comment #4)
> >
> > Note that the following scalar example also fails:
> >
> "Fortunately", it is invalid. :-)
>
> From 15
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113377
--- Comment #8 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 57166
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57166&action=edit
Testcase exercising passing of integer optional dummy arguments
This testcase passes with NAG and i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113471
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASS
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113152
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-01-21
Ever confirme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113152
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113152
--- Comment #18 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #17)
> Is there something that is different between your OS and FreeBSD?
> Or is there some fundamental difference between C and C++ that
> I am unaware of?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104908
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113377
--- Comment #11 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to GCC Commits from comment #10)
> * gfortran.dg/optional_absent_10.f90: New test.
According to gcc-testresults this new test fails on POWER BE systems:
FAIL: gfortran.dg/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111022
--- Comment #26 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #24)
> Currently gfortran does the following:
>
> character(20) :: fmt
> character(9) :: buffer
> fmt = "(1a1,d0.2,1a1)"
> write(buffer,fmt) ">", 3.0, "<"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104908
--- Comment #6 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Studying the cases that ICE (CLASS array dummy) and testcase PR95331.f90
which fixes an unlimited polymorphic problem, I tried the following change:
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/trans-array.cc b/gcc/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113621
--- Comment #1 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to seurer from comment #0)
> This appears to be a problem just on big endian.
This is only for -m32, right?
> Program received signal SIGSEGV: Segmentation fault - invalid memory
> ref
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113621
--- Comment #2 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I guess the following reduced testcase shows the same crash:
program test
implicit none
character(4) :: c(7) = "*"
call three_val (c)
contains
subroutine three_val (i, j)
character(4)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104908
--- Comment #7 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #6)
> This is currently regtesting.
Regtesting succeeded.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113338
--- Comment #3 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I just tried the example in comment#0 with ifort/ifx and noticed that it
may be over-simplified: the contained procedure is internal and thus not
visible to the external C code. The BIND attribut
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113671
--- Comment #2 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Another reduced variant:
program arrays10
implicit none
character(5), allocatable :: a(:)
character(:), allocatable :: b(:)
a = [ character(5) :: "one", "two", "three"]
b = [ character(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110987
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110987
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Segmentation fault after|[13/14 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110987
--- Comment #7 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to John Haiducek from comment #6)
> I encountered what appears to be the same bug under slightly different
> conditions; I've attached the corresponding code (see attachment named
> "Add
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111781
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113793
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115390
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115390
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Assignee|unassi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115390
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639
Bug 24639 depends on bug 115390, which changed state.
Bug 115390 Summary: Bogus -Wuninitialized warning when using CHARACTER(*)
argument in BIND(C) function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115390
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83865
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55978
--- Comment #33 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I've been repeatedly struggling with the testcase in comment#19.
Since the dump-tree did not reveal anything, I ran a reduced version
under gdb to see why the code crashes at -O0 and -Og but not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114019
--- Comment #2 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The following - seemingly hackish - change fixes the ICE:
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/trans-stmt.cc b/gcc/fortran/trans-stmt.cc
index 93b633e212e..60275e18867 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/trans-stmt.cc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104130
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|ice-on-valid-code |ice-on-invalid-code
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115689
--- Comment #5 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #4)
> (In reply to kargls from comment #3)
> > The code you posted is standard conforming, and when
> > compiled, executes as expected.
> >
> > My point is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114019
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |anlauf at gcc dot
gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114019
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115711
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115700
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115700
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115700
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |anlauf at gcc dot
gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107996
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-07-02
Statu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115788
Bug ID: 115788
Summary: [F2018] Implement OUT_OF_RANGE
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115700
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12/13/14 regression]|[11/12/13 regression] Bogus
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59104
--- Comment #8 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Paul,
are you planning to backport your fix?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113363
--- Comment #11 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Paul Thomas from comment #10)
> Leave open partly because it is awaiting backporting to 14-branch but also
> because there are remaining, pre-existing issues involving parentheses
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100273
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115935
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115884
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115781
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115781
--- Comment #2 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Interesting observation: replacing
call use_mats(mats)
by
call use_mats(mats(lbound(mats,1):))
leads to apparently correct output:
top level: mats, lbound= 2, ubound= 4
top level, 2:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103115
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103115
--- Comment #13 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #12)
> Created attachment 58695 [details]
> Tentative patch
>
> This patch fixes the ICE by ensuring to derive the element size of constant
> character elements
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103115
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #58695|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103115
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |anlauf at gcc dot
gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115997
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110288
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mscfd at gmx dot net
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55858
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59104
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |---
Status|RESOLV
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32834
Bug 32834 depends on bug 59104, which changed state.
Bug 59104 Summary: Wrong result with SIZE specification expression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59104
What|Removed |Added
2101 - 2200 of 2218 matches
Mail list logo
