https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93676
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90799
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92031
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91678
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98538
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Valid test:
template using CArray = U[];
template > struct X { };
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65455
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org|unassigned at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64918
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63944
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org|unassigned at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97427
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98547
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82099
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97975
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8/9/10 Regression] ICE |[8/9 Regression] ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96742
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96675
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98551
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98545
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-01-05
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98103
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98043
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8/9/10 Regression] ICE |[8/9 Regression] ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98441
--- Comment #8 from Marek Polacek ---
Looks like a simple thinko:
--- a/gcc/cp/decl.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/decl.c
@@ -12241,9 +12241,11 @@ grokdeclarator (const cp_declarator *declarator,
tree late_return_type =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98566
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
C++ tests aren't run in C++11 mode unless specified by GXX_TESTSUITE_STDS (to
alleviate testing times).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98566
Bug ID: 98566
Summary: g++.dg/warn/Wmismatched-dealloc.C fails with
-std=c++11
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98570
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98566
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98566
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-01-06
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98600
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98606
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96623
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98538
--- Comment #8 from Marek Polacek ---
(In reply to Nathan Sidwell from comment #5)
> I don;t think your patch is quite right. the call afterwards is making the
> assumption that DEPENDENT_TYPE_P is only ever set when
> DEPENDENT_TYPE_P_VALID is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98675
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98606
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98646
--- Comment #7 from Marek Polacek ---
Or, disable it when we call build_base_path with nonnull == 1?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86769
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98646
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #1)
> Confirmed. It must be an instance we missed in the fix for pr96003 where
> the C++ front end adds a COND_EXPR to static_cast.
>
> The larger context in the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98687
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96623
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98828
Bug ID: 98828
Summary: liblsan.so: undefined reference to
__lsan::GetThreadRangesLocked
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98803
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[C++20] ICE on invalid code |[10/11 Regression] [C++20]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98800
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-01-25
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97966
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[10/11 Regression] |[10 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96863
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98463
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc-bugs at marehr dot
dialup.fu-b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98659
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
(In reply to Matthias Klose from comment #4)
> I got reports for this issue for the gcc-10 branch as well. Please could you
> consider a backport?
That must be a different problem, perhaps 98333.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98756
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98790
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98570
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Maybe it was r226992 and our bisect binaries are broken :/.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98790
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98545
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96623
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
And an extended test to check that various variables are in scope:
constexpr int x = 0;
struct A {
int a1;
void foo (int p) {
int foovar;
struct B {
int b1;
void bar1 () noexcept(x);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97742
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98752
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98756
Bug ID: 98756
Summary: Suspicious "(*this)." in mangled symbol
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98659
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94751
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
Actually Comment 3 test is unrelated to the original issue here. Comment 3
will be fixed by my PR98659 fix, but not the original issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98752
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> But if we can fix it, I'd think it would be worth an exception.
Given the fix would likely only affect C++20 code, I think that would be
reasonable.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94751
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
I posted a patch for this which fixes this test too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98333
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[10/11 Regression] ICE in |[10 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98687
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86769
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
Further poking revealed that the patch above mishandles
// PR c++/86769
// { dg-do run }
#define assert(X) do { if (!(X)) __builtin_abort(); } while(0)
int g;
struct X {
X() { g++; }
~X() { g--; }
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98687
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Adjusted test:
extern "C" namespace std {
double log1p(double);
}
namespace std_fallback {
template void log1p();
}
template struct log1p_impl {
static int run() {
using std::log1p;
using
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98231
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98545
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Candidate fix:
--- a/gcc/cp/mangle.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/mangle.c
@@ -3349,7 +3349,8 @@ write_expression (tree expr)
else if (dependent_name (expr))
{
tree name = dependent_name (expr);
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98545
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #2)
> but I need to figure out how to test this.
[[gnu::used]] to actually emit the function.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98231
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98545
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98646
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98646
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Started with r11-1697.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98646
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
The reduced testcase is unfortunately overreduced :(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98646
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
A better one:
// PR c++/98646
// { dg-do compile }
// { dg-options "-Wnonnull" }
struct B {
void foo();
};
struct D : B {
void show();
};
void
D::show()
{
constexpr void *p = nullptr;
if (p)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98538
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Extended test:
template using A = int[1];
template> struct X { };
template
void
f (const A)
{
const A a;
}
template
struct Y {
const A a;
};
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98538
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Oops, I hadn't noticed that this PR has an assignee, since it's still in NEW.
Anyway, this was my patch:
--- a/gcc/cp/tree.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/tree.c
@@ -1341,7 +1341,9 @@ cp_build_qualified_type_real (tree
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98062
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98659
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98231
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
This seems to work...
--- a/gcc/cp/name-lookup.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/name-lookup.c
@@ -9279,4 +9279,14 @@ push_operator_bindings ()
}
}
+/* Wrapper around push_local_binding to push the bindings for
+ a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98515
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98642
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
$ ./cc1plus -quiet 98642.C
98642.C: In instantiation of ‘C& bar() [with C = const foo]’:
98642.C:19:25: required from here
98642.C:13:12: error: use of deleted function ‘base::base(base&&)’
13 |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98642
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|wrong "use of deleted |[10/11 Regression] wrong
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98639
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98642
Bug ID: 98642
Summary: wrong "use of deleted function" error
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63707
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97745
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98441
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90799
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98861
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98864
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96137
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
A more realistic test:
void
fn ()
{
X.operator T();
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94775
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8/9/10/11 Regression] ICE |[8/9/10 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98899
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Assignee|unassigned at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98355
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10/11 Regression] ICE in |[9/10 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98355
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98941
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98940
Bug 98940 depends on bug 98941, which changed state.
Bug 98941 Summary: [C++23] Implement P0330R2 - Literal Suffixes for ptrdiff_t
and size_t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98941
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98951
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98102
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97994
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98947
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Incorrect warning when |[10/11 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96462
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Probably can be fixed with just
--- a/gcc/cp/name-lookup.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/name-lookup.c
@@ -5702,6 +5702,13 @@ lookup_using_decl (tree scope, name_lookup )
if (TREE_CODE (scope) == NAMESPACE_DECL)
{
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96462
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96462
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Started with r271467.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80460
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98859
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever
301 - 400 of 2465 matches
Mail list logo
