https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59832
Matthijs van Duin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||matthijsvanduin at gmail dot
com
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78822
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78829
Bug ID: 78829
Summary: bit-rotten "C99 mode" references in GCC manual
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78661
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paul.richard.thomas at gmail
dot c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78817
--- Comment #16 from Martin Sebor ---
r243736 should avoid the warning in ordinary bootstrap. A patch for most of
the profiledbootstrap warnings has been posted for review here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-12/msg01437.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77914
--- Comment #4 from Adam Butcher ---
(In reply to Michele Caini from comment #3)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> > Shall we remove that altogether, or just pedwarn on it?
>
> I suspect it should be rejected, unless it is an inten
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78817
--- Comment #15 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Fri Dec 16 02:57:22 2016
New Revision: 243736
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243736&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR bootstrap/78817 - stage2 bootstrap failure in vec.h:1613:5: error: arg
I've just done some 'this' capture analysis using Clang (3.9.0), the current
stock ArchLinux GCC (6.2.1 20160830) and my own build of GCC (7.0.0 20161215)
including the patches above.
Clang stops short of a fully optimal solution. In fact it is less optimal than
GCC even for monomor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78662
--- Comment #3 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Patch submitted:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2016-12/msg00193.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77573
--- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor ---
David, thanks for looking into this! It never occurred to me that what GCC
prints is actually a string of octal numbers representing the first 7 bytes of
the wide string literal.
Either printing L"\x12345678
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78719
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78746
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||physiker at toast2 dot net
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78827
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
version 7.0.0 20161215 (experimental) [trunk revision 243680] (GCC)
COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS='-v' '-o' 'charlen_03' '-mmacosx-version-min=10.11.6'
'-asm_macosx_version_min=10.11' '-shared-libgcc' '-mtune=core2'
/usr/local/libexec/gcc/x86_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78763
--- Comment #9 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ian
Date: Thu Dec 15 22:47:43 2016
New Revision: 243729
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243729&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR go/78763
compiler: call determine_types even for con
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78826
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note there might be a rule about non trivial constructors in there too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78826
Bug ID: 78826
Summary: jump bypasses non-POD
Product: gcc
Version: 6.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: una
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78822
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78764
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71216
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rin at NetBSD dot org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78825
--- Comment #1 from Maciej Załucki ---
My first thought was that it's bug introduced with N3651 support
(C++14 variable templates) to GCC 5 and partially fixed in GCC 5.2.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78764
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78824
--- Comment #2 from Piotr ---
avr-gcc actually
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78825
Bug ID: 78825
Summary: missing error for template partial specialization
using template alias type
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78824
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Works for me on aarch64-linux-gnu with GCC 5.4 and above:
main:
adrpx1, nvx8
adrpx2, y
mov w0, 0
ldrbw1, [x1, #:lo12:nvx8]
lsl w1, w1, 4
str
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78823
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc64-linux-gnu,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78824
Bug ID: 78824
Summary: multiple add should in my opinion be optimized to
multiplication
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78798
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Looking through gfortran.h, some more candidates which could be converted:
int gfc_at_end (void);
int gfc_at_eof (void);
int gfc_at_bol (void);
int gfc_at_eol (void);
int gfc_check_include (void);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30026
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29842
Bug 29842 depends on bug 30119, which changed state.
Bug 30119 Summary: libjava testsuite output is erratic and unhelpful
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30119
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30119
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29858
Bug 29858 depends on bug 30119, which changed state.
Bug 30119 Summary: libjava testsuite output is erratic and unhelpful
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30119
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78817
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71110
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77573
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78154
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78817
--- Comment #13 from Martin Sebor ---
(In reply to Franz Sirl from comment #7)
> And on x86_64 a profiledbootstrap with --enable-checking=yes fails like this:
I have just confirmed this by doing the same. My profiledbootstrap shows the
followin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16427
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36602
Bug 36602 depends on bug 16427, which changed state.
Bug 16427 Summary: dead memset not optimized away
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16427
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78771
--- Comment #2 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Created attachment 40345
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40345&action=edit
simpler testcase
the deletedness of the template ctor is a red herring. Also the templatedness
of the base cl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78817
--- Comment #12 from Martin Sebor ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #3)
> It is a warning (as well as a bootstrap comparison error) on powerpc64-linux.
> You tested on powerpc64le-linux, different animal.
I missed that. But I'm n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78798
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Thu Dec 15 20:54:18 2016
New Revision: 243726
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243726&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-12-15 Janus Weil
PR fortran/78798
* gfo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77485
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61912
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||petschy at gmail dot com
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61912
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #2 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64380
--- Comment #1 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
So the missed dead stores are due to DSE's inability to walk through the loop
in ReleaseAll. As a result stores occurring prior to that loop can't be
discovered as dead.
For reference, here's an example th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78662
--- Comment #2 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Status. This is one of those where I was looking at the solution and did not
see it for a while. Then it pops into view. The strings are stored with the
double quotes and passed that way to the write routines
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77585
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77585
--- Comment #3 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Author: nathan
Date: Thu Dec 15 19:50:25 2016
New Revision: 243723
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243723&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/77585
* pt.c (instantiate_decl): Push to class sc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77829
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78823
Bug ID: 78823
Summary: Poor code on PowerPC when moving SFmode values between
GPRs and vector registers
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77485
--- Comment #10 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
[0.00%]:
MEM[(char[170] *)& + 30B] = {};
.buf[0] = 48;
[ ... ]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78639
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78658
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78787
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #3)
> Created attachment 40343 [details]
> Hack to debug diagnostic-color.c
$ ./xgcc -B. -O2 -Wall -Wextra -flto /home/david/coding-3/gcc-git-clean/src/z.c
should_colo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78787
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78718
--- Comment #3 from Jim MacArthur ---
It looks to me like the assertion failure is because the symbol in the argument
expression doesn't have the attr.referenced bit set. resolve_actual_arglist
replaces the symtree in the 'z' expression when it f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78819
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Run-time testcase:
__attribute__((noinline, noclone)) void
foo (int argc)
{
if (argc <= 0 || argc > 3)
return;
switch (argc)
{
case 1:
case 3:
if (argc != 3)
__builtin_abor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78540
Bill Seurer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||seurer at linux dot
vnet.ibm.com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78811
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78680
--- Comment #7 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Thu Dec 15 18:05:05 2016
New Revision: 243721
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243721&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix use-after-free lexing unterminated raw strings (PR preprocessor/788
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78811
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Thu Dec 15 18:05:05 2016
New Revision: 243721
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243721&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix use-after-free lexing unterminated raw strings (PR preprocessor/788
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78822
Bug ID: 78822
Summary: [cleanup] replace static char buffers by std:string
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78763
--- Comment #8 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
Here is a test case that recreates the problem.
package p
import (
"unsafe"
)
func F() int {
if unsafe.Sizeof(0) == 8 {
return 8
}
return 0
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78812
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The problem is that the hoisting code seems to assume the hoisting would be
performed at the end of a bb, but that is not what insert_insn_end_basic_block
will then actually do. But by the time insert_insn_e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78817
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Looking at the gengtype.c case, I think it is quite common case.
static inline const char*
get_input_file_name (const input_file *inpf)
{
if (inpf)
return inpf->inpname;
return NULL;
}
const char
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71321
Bernd Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernds at gcc dot gnu.org
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78540
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Dec 15 15:11:05 2016
New Revision: 243693
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243693&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/78540
* gcc.dg/pr78540.c: Add -w to dg-opti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77834
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Dec 15 15:11:05 2016
New Revision: 243693
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243693&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/78540
* gcc.dg/pr78540.c: Add -w to dg-opti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78817
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Note, users that want this to be diagnosed reliably already can use
-fsanitize={returns-,}nonnull-attribute
So I think it is better to warn only about the obvious cases with very low
false positive rate, and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78817
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78817
--- Comment #8 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
trippels@gcc2-power8 linux % cat sm_ftl.i
int sm_read_sector_zone;
int *sm_read_sector_buffer = &sm_read_sector_zone;
int sm_read_sector() {
__builtin_memset(sm_read_sector_buffer, 0, 1);
again:
if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59170
--- Comment #17 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I've added some more checks for non-debug iterators.
The only thing remaining is to add checks for debug iterators to detect when
they are past-the-end.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59874
--- Comment #15 from Allan Jensen ---
Yes, the patch works and it also evaluates at compile time.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78800
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59170
--- Comment #16 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Thu Dec 15 14:13:36 2016
New Revision: 243692
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243692&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR59170 make pretty printers check for singular iterators
PR li
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78800
--- Comment #1 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Thu Dec 15 14:07:51 2016
New Revision: 243691
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243691&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-12-15 Janus Weil
PR fortran/78800
* int
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78800
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
--- Comment #2 from janus
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59161
--- Comment #12 from Pedro Alves ---
> So I think the libstdc++ part is fixed,
Thanks. TBC, given the pointer example in comment #9, I think GDB's implicit
use of options.addressprint=off for pretty printers is a clear GDB bug. I
think GDB sh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59161
--- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I've forced the relevant printers to convert to a string explicitly, so now you
always get the address, which seems better than {ref = }
So I think the libstdc++ part is fixed, do we want a GDB bug to con
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59161
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Thu Dec 15 13:25:22 2016
New Revision: 243690
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243690&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR59161 make pretty printers always return strings
PR libstdc++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78797
--- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #6)
> Ok. Btw, the draft version of the F15 standard linked from the gfortran wiki
> is:
>
> http://j3-fortran.org/doc/year/15/15-007.pdf
>
> (from December 2014).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78797
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to paul.richard.tho...@gmail.com from comment #5)
> I do apologise, it seems that Mr Reid did not do his usual update. We
> will have to work from the draft standard itself.
Ok. Btw, the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78800
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|un
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78817
Franz Sirl changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sirl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4
etienne_lorrain at yahoo dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77484
--- Comment #12 from wilco at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to wilco from comment #10)
> (In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #9)
> > Created attachment 40217 [details]
> > predict
> >
> > Hi,
> > here is patch adding the polymorphic case, too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39456
etienne_lorrain at yahoo dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59161
--- Comment #9 from Pedro Alves ---
> Sounds like Paul's original patch may have introduced an undesired
> conflation. AFAICS, options.addressprint's exists to implement "set print
> address on/off", which had for original motivation, from the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78812
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59161
--- Comment #8 from Pedro Alves ---
Sounds like Paul's original patch may have introduced an undesired conflation.
AFAICS, options.addressprint's exists to implement "set print address on/off",
which had for original motivation, from the manual:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14295
Bug 14295 depends on bug 24177, which changed state.
Bug 24177 Summary: function returning structure produce very long/slow assembly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24177
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24177
etienne_lorrain at yahoo dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22141
--- Comment #42 from etienne_lorrain at yahoo dot fr ---
Separate Bug 78821 has been successfully created following comment 41
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78821
Bug ID: 78821
Summary: GCC7: Copying whole 32 bits structure field by field
not optimised into copying whole 32 bits at once
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78819
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78819
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59161
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This behaviour effectively means pretty printers for generic C++ types must
never return gdb.Value from to_string() because they have no idea if GDB's
default stringification will be sane. An optional can't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78819
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78819
Bug ID: 78819
Summary: [7 Regression] Wrong code with VRP caused by register
assertions along default switch labels
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
1 - 100 of 111 matches
Mail list logo