https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96137
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98355
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94775
--- Comment #17 from Marek Polacek ---
Another attempt:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-January/564461.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98861
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98861
--- Comment #9 from Marek Polacek ---
You can clone the gcc repo as explained here https://gcc.gnu.org/git.html and
then start your own local branch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88101
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98940
Bug ID: 98940
Summary: Implement C++23 language features
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: meta-bug
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98940
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98941
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
WIP: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-February/564675.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98941
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-02-02
Blocks|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98942
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98942
Bug ID: 98942
Summary: [C++23] Implement P1102R2 - Down with ()!
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
URL: https://wg21.link/p1102r2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98941
Bug ID: 98941
Summary: [C++23] Implement P0330R2 - Literal Suffixes for
ptrdiff_t and size_t
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98899
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=98947
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98951
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101015
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
This is because dump_decl does the decoration for TYPE_DECL_ALIAS_P:
1228 if (TYPE_DECL_ALIAS_P (t)
1229 && (flags & TFF_DECL_SPECIFIERS
1230 || flags &
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101032
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100977
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93955
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100974
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100752
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Duh, we don't defer parsing of noexcept for any ptr-operator, like
struct S {
int& f() noexcept(noexcept(i));
int i;
};
Awkward, but the fix should be simple.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100975
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100976
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100065
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Fixed on trunk so far, will backport.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100979
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89062
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||brycelelbach at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100983
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100065
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96560
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100986
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97375
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100995
Bug ID: 100995
Summary: Extend std::is_constant_evaluated in if warning
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100995
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97202
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||felix.morgner at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100997
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100997
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
To make it work just remove the "" in A() {}.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101013
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101015
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-06-10
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100995
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101165
Bug ID: 101165
Summary: [C++23] P2266R1 - Simpler implicit move
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101165
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101051
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Summary|[ICE] in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101000
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-06-09
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99032
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100596
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
Rejecting such code was the point of the patch. I guess we'll have to either
downgrade to a warning or just not complain about GNU attributes at all.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100649
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87765
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100649
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
The ICE appeared with r251423.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100649
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100652
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100459
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100596
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100596
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99032
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Current test:
class X { };
template
void foo (T1, T2);
struct S {
[[deprecated]] friend void f(); // error
[[deprecated]] friend void f2() { }
friend void f3 [[deprecated]] (); // error
friend void
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100789
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94490
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100752
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101368
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101087
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101370
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-07-08
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100409
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101371
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101371
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
The ICE started with r247813.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57314
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=98939
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100975
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=100976
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #2)
> Or rather,
>
> int main()
> {
> constexpr const int = 42;
> static_assert(r == 42); // { dg-bogus "" }
> }
>
> [expr.const]/4.7 says that "a temporary
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100975
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Looks like just disabling the check in create_array_type_for_decl lets us
compile:
struct false_type { static constexpr bool value = false; };
struct true_type { static constexpr bool value = true; };
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100752
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12 Regression] error: |[11 Regression] error:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100975
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98940
Bug 98940 depends on bug 100975, which changed state.
Bug 100975 Summary: [C++23] Allow pointer to array of auto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100975
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101241
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
I cannot reproduce this:
$ xg++ -c a-eigen_bug.ii -O3 -ffast-math -march=haswell
compiles.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101241
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101371
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.5
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101371
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101421
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=101402
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51851
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickhuang99 at hotmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101371
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Reduced more:
struct A {
int i;
};
struct B {
A a{};
constexpr B() : a() {}
constexpr B(const B ) : a(rhs.a) {}
};
struct C {
B arr[1];
};
constexpr C
fn ()
{
C c{};
return c;
}
C c = fn();
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101371
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
And this should compile fine but doesn't since r269078:
struct A {
int i;
};
struct B {
A a{};
constexpr B() : a() {}
constexpr B(const B ) : a(rhs.a) {}
};
struct C {
B arr[1];
};
constexpr C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101087
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Summary|[9/10/11/12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100409
Bug 100409 depends on bug 101087, which changed state.
Bug 101087 Summary: [9 Regression] Unevaluated operand of sizeof affects
noexcept operator
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101087
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101181
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100459
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100752
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100976
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=100241
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Now reproduced with a single file. Reducing that...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100241
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Single, hopefully valid TU, no LTO needed:
$ gcc -march=armv8-a -fPIC -O3 100241.c -fvisibility=internal -c
100241.c: In function ‘vp9_first_pass_encode_tile_mb_row’:
100241.c:32:1: error: unable to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100252
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Internal compiler error |[8/9/10/11/12 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100261
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100055
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
This fixes https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99465#c1 but not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99465#c0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100271
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95317
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zchendd at connect dot ust.hk
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89522
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86594
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100291
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100291
Bug ID: 100291
Summary: internal compiler error: trying to capture ‘this’ in
instantiation of generic lambda
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97533
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100339
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nathan at gcc dot gnu.org
401 - 500 of 2465 matches
Mail list logo