https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85357
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to cfd from comment #5)
> It would be rather surprising if the Fortran standard viewed this as being
> invalid code (the procedure in question is bound to a dervied type,
> hence should
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87148
Bug ID: 87148
Summary: backward compatibility issue to take char [] as
incomplete type
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49224
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at redhat dot com,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86540
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84561
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86856
--- Comment #12 from jon_y <10walls at gmail dot com> ---
I've just tested the trunk version as a Linux native build, I don't see the
warnings.
I will proceed to do a mingw cross compiler soon with the trunk version.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87139
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81300
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cbcode at gmail dot com
--- Comment #7 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87053
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87053
--- Comment #1 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Wed Aug 29 22:16:09 2018
New Revision: 263968
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263968=gcc=rev
Log:
gcc:
2018-08-22 Bernd Edlinger
PR middle-end/87053
* builtins.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84561
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86714
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86711
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87095
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Aug 29 21:43:18 2018
New Revision: 263967
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263967=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c++/87095
* decl.c (begin_destructor_body): If
/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/9.0.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc/configure --prefix=/home/absozero/trunk/root-gcc
--enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-werror --enable-multilib
Thread model: posix
gcc version 9.0.0 20180829 (experimental) [trunk revision 263965
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87117
--- Comment #16 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #15)
> On Wed, 29 Aug 2018, dcb314 at hotmail dot com wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87117
> >
> > --- Comment #14 from David
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87146
Bug ID: 87146
Summary: ubsan bootstrap with non-gcc compiler fails
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87145
Bug ID: 87145
Summary: Implicit conversion to scoped enum fails: "error:
taking address of temporary/rvalue"
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29550
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #44600|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85357
--- Comment #5 from c...@mnet-mail.de ---
It would be rather surprising if the Fortran standard viewed this as being
invalid code (the procedure in question is bound to a dervied type,
hence should
be overridable).
Better to consult the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86106
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc |powerpc*-*-*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87144
Bug ID: 87144
Summary: missing -Wformat for mismatched argument type
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67491
Bug 67491 depends on bug 85265, which changed state.
Bug 85265 Summary: [concepts] ICE with missing identifier
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85265
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85265
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85265
--- Comment #2 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Wed Aug 29 20:29:55 2018
New Revision: 263966
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263966=gcc=rev
Log:
/cp
2018-08-29 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/85265
* parser.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86856
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84898
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85357
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87088
--- Comment #14 from Jonathan Wakely ---
There is no GCC bug here.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87074
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
outer->header is:
bb_4 (preds = {bb_3 bb_11 }, succs = {bb_5 })
{
[local count: 118111601]:
# f.10_31 = PHI
# .MEM_34 = PHI <.MEM_18(D)(3), .MEM_21(11)>
# g_lsm.15_33 = PHI
_75 =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87137
--- Comment #10 from Nathan Sidwell ---
gcc-8 patch posted https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-08/msg01900.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87088
--- Comment #13 from miltonkbenjamin ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #12)
> (In reply to miltonkbenjamin from comment #11)
> > > C:\parser>g++ -include iostream.h -Xpreprocessor "FlexLexer.h"
> > > lex1.yy.cc
>
> You're STILL
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87133
--- Comment #7 from Segher Boessenkool ---
lang_hooks.types.type_for_mode can return NULL, but emit_library_call_value
cannot handle that.
Why it fails on a cross and not natively, I don't know... target bug is
my guess.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86714
--- Comment #8 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Wed Aug 29 17:17:08 2018
New Revision: 263963
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263963=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/86714
PR tree-optimization/86711
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86711
--- Comment #5 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Wed Aug 29 17:17:08 2018
New Revision: 263963
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263963=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/86714
PR tree-optimization/86711
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87143
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86995
--- Comment #6 from Vlad Lazar ---
Here's the patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-08/msg01889.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87138
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 44626
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44626=edit
gcc9-pr87138.patch
That revision just uncovered a latent bug in expand_mult_const. If val_so_far
is above
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87139
--- Comment #5 from cbcode at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #4)
> (In reply to cbcode from comment #2)
> > Created attachment 44621 [details]
> > test reproducing the problem
>
> How to show the problem?
Save the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87143
Bug ID: 87143
Summary: Uninitialized warnings when using automatic array
allocation
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30812
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nathan at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87138
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87142
Bug ID: 87142
Summary: Aliasing issue with overloaded assignment and
allocatable components
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87137
--- Comment #9 from Liu Hao ---
(In reply to Nathan Sidwell from comment #6)
> Created attachment 44623 [details]
> patch
>
> This patch appears to fix the problem It'd be good to (a) confirms it also
> passes on MS's compiler
With this patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87141
Bug ID: 87141
Summary: configure:14586: error: Could not determine word size.
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87139
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87137
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
It compiles successfully with MSVC https://godbolt.org/z/Cw-yiW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87132
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87137
--- Comment #7 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Created attachment 44624
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44624=edit
this is the testcase
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87137
--- Comment #6 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Created attachment 44623
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44623=edit
patch
This patch appears to fix the problem It'd be good to (a) confirms it also
passes on MS's compiler
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87138
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87140
Bug ID: 87140
Summary: Segmentation fault in priority_list_upgrade_task
function when execution tasks with priority
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87132
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Aug 29 14:13:20 2018
New Revision: 263959
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263959=gcc=rev
Log:
2018-08-29 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/87132
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87137
--- Comment #5 from Nathan Sidwell ---
what should the layout of the following be?
struct Foo {
unsigned one : 24;
static int var;
unsigned two : 4;
};
is this size 8 or 4?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85110
--- Comment #7 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Wed Aug 29 13:52:22 2018
New Revision: 263957
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263957=gcc=rev
Log:
C++: underline param in print_conversion_rejection (more PR c++/85110)
Consider
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87133
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
Backtrace from GDB with function arguments visible:
#0 0x015140fd in aggregate_value_p (exp=0x0, fntype=0x0) at
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/function.c:2046
#1 0x00f3d2e0 in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87133
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
In calls.c I see:
│4742 if (outmode != VOIDmode)
│4743{
│4744 tfom = lang_hooks.types.type_for_mode (outmode, 0);
>│4745 if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87133
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
ubsan build helps:
$ UBSAN_OPTIONS=print_stacktrace=1 ./xgcc -B.
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/real_do_1.f90
-frounding-math
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87133
--- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool ---
... Nope, works fine with trunk as well. You must be doing something you're
not telling us?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87139
--- Comment #3 from cbcode at gmail dot com ---
-fno-strict-aliasing makes no difference.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87139
cbcode at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cbcode at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86593
--- Comment #9 from Sandro Mani ---
Thanks
--- Comment #10 from Sandro Mani ---
Thanks
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86593
--- Comment #9 from Sandro Mani ---
Thanks
--- Comment #10 from Sandro Mani ---
Thanks
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86726
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86593
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87137
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86726
--- Comment #1 from Alexander Monakov ---
Author: amonakov
Date: Wed Aug 29 12:39:12 2018
New Revision: 263955
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263955=gcc=rev
Log:
doc: document -ftree-scev-cprop
PR other/86726
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57170
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
It should be an error, not a warning. For other narrowing conversions involving
constants we do actually use -Wnarrowing (but still defaulting to an error) so
I guess my last comment was wrong.
Or it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87122
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Aug 29 12:32:13 2018
New Revision: 263954
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263954=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c++/87122
* pt.c (tsubst_expr) : If
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87122
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Aug 29 12:27:55 2018
New Revision: 263953
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263953=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c++/87122
* pt.c (tsubst_expr) : If
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87117
--- Comment #15 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 29 Aug 2018, dcb314 at hotmail dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87117
>
> --- Comment #14 from David Binderman ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87117
--- Comment #14 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #10)
> Didn't check ubsan bootstrap.
I did. It seems to work at the -O2 level.
-O3 level hasn't worked for months, but that's an old problem.
ints and longs not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87137
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ABI, wrong-code
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45113
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2017-08-17 00:00:00 |2018-8-29
--- Comment #3 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86995
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Like:
--- gcc/expmed.c.jj 2018-08-26 22:42:22.526779583 +0200
+++ gcc/expmed.c2018-08-29 14:04:32.669509929 +0200
@@ -6239,7 +6239,9 @@ canonicalize_comparison (machine_mode mo
wrapping
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87138
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87139
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-*, i?86-*-*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87137
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86995
--- Comment #4 from Vlad Lazar ---
That's right. It's not the right fix. The actual cause is the use of wi::add in
r263591, which does not set the flag in case of underflow. The correct way is
to use wi::add for addition and wi::sub for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87139
Bug ID: 87139
Summary: 6.4 x86_64 incorrect code generation with -O3 around
_addcarry_u64
Product: gcc
Version: 6.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87137
--- Comment #3 from Sandro Mani ---
See
https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/commit/ab87ee8f509c0b600102195704105d4d98ec59d9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87137
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nathan at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86995
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86540
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|marxin at gcc dot gnu.org |law at gcc dot gnu.org
---
ost=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu --target=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
--with-ld=/usr/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-ld
--with-as=/usr/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-as --disable-libstdcxx-pch
--prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-263946-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-amd64
Thread model: posix
gcc version 9.0.0 20180829 (experimen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87130
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86593
--- Comment #7 from Sandro Mani ---
Any chance of getting the fix committed?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87137
Sandro Mani changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||i686-w64-mingw32,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87137
Bug ID: 87137
Summary: [8 Regression] Non-virtual member function increases
struct size
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87130
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Wed Aug 29 10:48:50 2018
New Revision: 263950
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263950=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix thinko in lto.c (PR bootstrap/87130).
2018-08-29 Martin Liska
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87133
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Actually, doesn't fail on powerpc64le-linux either. Well let me try some
brand spanking new tree...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87136
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31413
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31413
--- Comment #28 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Aug 29 10:05:55 2018
New Revision: 263948
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263948=gcc=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/31413 fix test failure on Debian systems
Debian uses a different
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87133
--- Comment #1 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Does not fail on powerpc64-linux, even with -mlittle -mabi=elfv2 .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87136
--- Comment #1 from Darko Veberic ---
Created attachment 44619
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44619=edit
the actual cc source file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87136
Bug ID: 87136
Summary: internal compiler error: in emit_move_insn, at
expr.c:3722
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87134
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
You also might want to test the patch from PR87132.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87132
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Simplified:
extern void abort (void);
int c, d;
int main()
{
int e[] = {4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4};
d = 8;
for (; d; d--)
for (int a = 0; a <= 8; a++)
{
c = e[1];
e[d] = 0;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87135
Bug ID: 87135
Summary: [C++17] unordered containers violate iterator validity
requirements
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
1 - 100 of 110 matches
Mail list logo
