https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86547
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86547
--- Comment #8 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Wed Aug 15 04:09:45 2018
New Revision: 263548
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263548=gcc=rev
Log:
PR target/86547
* lra-lives.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65604
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69089
--- Comment #6 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Dominik Vogt from comment #5)
> No, up to now you're the only one who commented on it. I keep pinging it
> once in a while.
Please keep pinging it!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67012
Mathias Stearn changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||redbeard0531 at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86777
--- Comment #1 from Jie Zhang ---
(In reply to Richard Earnshaw from comment #0)
> The bfin port needs updating for this CVE. See the linked meta bug for
> details of possible actions required.
For Blackfin, the speculative load only happens
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86954
--- Comment #4 from frankhb1989 at gmail dot com ---
Well, actually I'm not sure if the original implementation has done the right
thing, as I don't find that the standard has requirement to specify that the
replaced definitions must acknowledge
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86731
--- Comment #2 from Will Schmidt ---
Thanks for the bug report.
The patch (attached) has also been posted to gcc-patches for review.
Thanks,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86731
--- Comment #1 from Will Schmidt ---
Created attachment 44542
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44542=edit
preliminary patch to resolve the problem
preliminary/rfc patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28848
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29842
Bug 29842 depends on bug 28848, which changed state.
Bug 28848 Summary: argument mismatch for late-prototyped function should be
warning, not error
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28848
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86872
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
line-map.c has
linemap_assert (reason != LC_ENTER_MACRO);
line_map_ordinary *map
= linemap_check_ordinary (new_linemap (set, start_location));
map->reason = reason;
We get here with reason !=
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86945
--- Comment #3 from Harald Anlauf ---
Self contained alternative testcase:
program test
implicit none
integer, volatile :: id,ierr
id = 1
print*,'id=',id
call foo1 ()
print*,'ierr1, OK = ',ierr, ierr == 0
call foo2 ()
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84840
Vladimir Reshetnikov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|VERIFIED
--- Comment #3 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84798
Vladimir Reshetnikov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|VERIFIED
--- Comment #11 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84839
Vladimir Reshetnikov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|VERIFIED
--- Comment #5 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86728
Vladimir Reshetnikov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|VERIFIED
--- Comment #7 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86915
Vladimir Reshetnikov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|VERIFIED
--- Comment #4 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86958
Vladimir Reshetnikov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED
--- Comment #6 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86961
Bug ID: 86961
Summary: ICE in finish_member_declaration when an alias
template is used
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86945
--- Comment #2 from Harald Anlauf ---
Changing the line:
case(:-1)
to
case(-HUGE(0):-1)
makes the bug disappear; changing it to
case(-HUGE(0)-1:-1)
makes it reappear.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86945
Harald Anlauf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gmx dot de
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86958
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86960
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84908
--- Comment #13 from Andy Lutomirski ---
I find this whole discussion very confusing. The problem has nothing to do
with relocations AFAICT. The problem is that gcc is (as requested) generating
retpolines, and it's set up to do it by calling
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86958
--- Comment #4 from Vladimir Reshetnikov ---
Apparently, I somehow pasted a wrong code into this bug report. If you wish,
you can close this one, and I will file proper one(s).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86960
Bug ID: 86960
Summary: [Regression] internal compiler error: in
coerce_template_parms
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65043
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Testing a patch now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86918
--- Comment #4 from Vladimir Reshetnikov ---
I could not find a wording in the Standard that disallows this kind of
specialization (although certainly I might have overlooked it). A similar code
where the template parameter list is changed in a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84908
--- Comment #12 from Jason Vas Dias ---
RE: Comment #11 :
> notrace int _RETPOLINE_FUNC_ATTR_
> __vdso_clock_gettime(clockid_t clock, struct timespec *ts)
should of course be
notrace _RETPOLINE_FUNC_ATTR_
int
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86954
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86954
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Tue Aug 14 20:19:20 2018
New Revision: 263542
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263542=gcc=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/86954 use non-placement operator delete
As explained in the PR,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86954
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Arguably this was good defensive programming for C++03. The program could have
replaced operator new(size_t) and operator delete(void*) but not replaced
operator new(size_t, const nothrow_t&) and operator
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86959
Bug ID: 86959
Summary: Use of a variadic alias template unexpectedly breaks
compilation
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86958
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
note: expected a constant of type ‘bool’, got ‘bool’
Though this is clearly bogus.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86958
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86958
--- Comment #1 from Vladimir Reshetnikov ---
Sorry, there is a missing closing parenthesis in my code. The last line should
look like this:
static_assert(Outer::Alias::value == sizeof(bool)); // error
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65043
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Simplified:
struct X
{
X(bool) { }
};
int main()
{
X x{1.2};
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86958
Bug ID: 86958
Summary: ICE in finish_member_declaration when an alias
template is used
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78244
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
And with class templates:
template
struct S {
static const int i{1.1};
};
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78244
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Another simple test:
template
decltype(int{1.1}) v;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86650
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor ---
Another small enhancement committed in r263541. The inlining context is not
yet included so leaving this open until it's done.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86650
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Tue Aug 14 19:11:20 2018
New Revision: 263541
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263541=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/86650 - -Warray-bounds missing inlining context
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86957
Bug ID: 86957
Summary: gcc should warn about missing profiles for a
compilation unit or a new function with -fprofile-use
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86116
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Tue Aug 14 19:09:33 2018
New Revision: 263540
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263540=gcc=rev
Log:
2018-08-14 Janus Weil
PR fortran/86116
* interface.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86956
Bug ID: 86956
Summary: Use of an alias template unexpectedly breaks
compilation
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86914
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78244
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Enhanced testcase (so that I don't lose it):
template
auto f1(T) -> decltype(int{2.0}, void()) { }
template
auto f2(T) -> decltype(int{2.0}) { return 1; }
template
auto f3(T) -> decltype(void(),
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86953
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Started with r230365 -- Merge C++ delayed folding branch..
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86953
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
struct B {
double x;
bool isfreex;
bool isfreey;
constexpr bool operator==(const B& other) const noexcept
{
return (x == other.x) && (isfreex == other.isfreex) && (isfreey ==
other.isfreey);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86731
Will Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86955
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Blocks|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86955
Bug ID: 86955
Summary: strlen of a known string in member array plus offset
not folded
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86948
--- Comment #4 from Alexander Monakov ---
Created attachment 44541
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44541=edit
generic expansion for mult-highpart
This patch implements fallback via widening multiply; works for the gimple
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86590
--- Comment #29 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The seemingly-redundant 'else' keywords in the patch are needed because of PR
86678.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86590
--- Comment #28 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Created attachment 44540
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44540=edit
Use __builtin_is_constant_evaluated()
I tried to replace the __builtin_constant_p and __constant_string conditions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86954
Bug ID: 86954
Summary: redundant nothrow in call of ::operator delete
Product: gcc
Version: 8.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86953
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86953
--- Comment #1 from Rémi DUCCESCHI ---
Created attachment 44539
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44539=edit
Small test case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86953
Bug ID: 86953
Summary: compiler crashes with constexpr operator== and
specific struct (cxx_eval_bit_field_ref, at
cp/constexpr.c:2704)
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86678
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2018-07-26 00:00:00 |2018-8-14
--- Comment #4 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84908
--- Comment #11 from Jason Vas Dias ---
In reply to Comment #9 :
Thanks Andy -
I think it is because when the retpoline flags are enabled ,
the 'static inline' function calls in vclock_gettime.c
have default function attributes which differ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84908
--- Comment #10 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Andy Lutomirski from comment #9)
> I haven't fully dug into this, but I do one one immediate question: why is
> GCC generating a jump table for a five-entry switch statement if retpolines
> are on?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86952
Bug ID: 86952
Summary: Avoid jump table for switch statement with
-mindirect-branch=thunk
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86724
--- Comment #8 from Matthias Klose ---
Author: doko
Date: Tue Aug 14 15:15:39 2018
New Revision: 263539
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263539=gcc=rev
Log:
2018-08-14 Matthias Klose
Backport from mainline
2018-08-01
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86948
--- Comment #3 from Alexander Monakov ---
Created attachment 44537
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44537=edit
expose mult-highpart via GIMPLE FE
Attaching a patch that allows creating MULT_HIGHPART_EXPR via GIMPLE FE, which
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86590
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86951
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86951
Bug ID: 86951
Summary: arm speculation barrier incompatible with ARMv6 or
earlier
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: assemble-failure
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84908
Andy Lutomirski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||luto at kernel dot org
--- Comment #9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86599
--- Comment #20 from The Written Word
---
Created attachment 44536
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44536=edit
stdlib.h long_double patch for HP-UX 11.31/PA
Tested against 7.3.0 and 8.2.0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79433
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79323
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86623
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86950
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86948
--- Comment #2 from Alexander Monakov ---
Thanks for the heads-up. At present, BRIG frontend cannot rely on
MULT_HIGHPART, as the pattern is optional and, as this bug shows, generic
expansion is not implemented. BRIG frontend is already somewhat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86950
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
Fixed testcase:
template
auto f(T) -> decltype(void(), 1) { return 1; }
int
main ()
{
f(0);
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86950
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86950
Bug ID: 86950
Summary: internal compiler error: unexpected expression
‘void()’ of kind cast_expr
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86846
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86846
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Tue Aug 14 13:13:37 2018
New Revision: 263536
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263536=gcc=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/86846 Alternative to pointer-width atomics
Define a class using
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86946
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86948
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85343
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85343
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Tue Aug 14 12:09:57 2018
New Revision: 263535
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263535=gcc=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/85343 overload __throw_ios_failure to take errno
[ios::failure] p2:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86949
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86949
Bug ID: 86949
Summary: gcc generate an error because delete operator is
private when it isn't needed
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86846
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
OK, thanks. The second patch might not be needed for hppa64-hp-hpux11.11 but
would be for targets without pointer-width atomics and without
PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER, so I'll commit that version.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86846
--- Comment #8 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2018-08-11 8:04 PM, redi at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86846
>
> --- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
> This should do it:
The testsuite isn't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86948
Bug ID: 86948
Summary: Internal compiler error compiling
brig.dg/test/gimple/mulhi.hsail
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86944
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86871
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86871
--- Comment #9 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Tue Aug 14 09:24:45 2018
New Revision: 263528
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263528=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix invalid assumption in vect_transform_stmt (PR 86871)
The
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70472
Simon Brand changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||simonrbrand at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86921
--- Comment #8 from Yakov ---
(In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #7)
> This has nothing to do with gcc, it is a property of the terminal emulation.
ok. all my terminals have this problem)=
thanks for help
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86921
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86921
--- Comment #6 from Yakov ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #5)
> (In reply to Yakov from comment #4)
> > I am sorry. I think, I did mistake in my question. I did not press Enter.
>
> You said "when the second line begins. symbols,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86942
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86947
Bug ID: 86947
Summary: Erroneous code generated with O2 and O3 for PPC
Product: gcc
Version: 8.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86921
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Yakov from comment #4)
> I am sorry. I think, I did mistake in my question. I did not press Enter.
You said "when the second line begins. symbols, entered in first line"
If that doesn't mean
1 - 100 of 108 matches
Mail list logo
