https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79671
--- Comment #73 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 27 Mar 2017, jason at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79671
>
> --- Comment #72 from Jason Merrill ---
> (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68028
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36453
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sbansal at ciena dot com
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80231
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80230
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80229
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80227
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80229
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Tue Mar 28 07:35:04 2017
New Revision: 246520
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246520&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/80229 restore support for shared_ptr
PR libstdc++/8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79671
--- Comment #74 from Bernd Edlinger ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #73)
>
> Ah, I remember seeing this. So this introduces object size as a way
> to allow some TBAA to happen. Specifically it forbids creating
> a series of flo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79671
--- Comment #75 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 28 Mar 2017, bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot de wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79671
>
> --- Comment #74 from Bernd Edlinger ---
> (In reply to rguent...@suse.de fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80232
Bug ID: 80232
Summary: Ofast pessimizes Sparse matmult in scimark2 benchmark
on avx platforms
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80229
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80230
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Please stop reporting a bug every time your code doesn't compile.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80067
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Tue Mar 28 08:13:04 2017
New Revision: 246521
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246521&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/80067
* fold-const.c (fold_comparison): Us
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80067
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Tue Mar 28 08:16:27 2017
New Revision: 246522
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246522&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/80067
* fold-const.c (fold_comparison): Us
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80067
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79931
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
I can confirm that, it's not Ubuntu specific, easily reproducible on current
trunk.
Issues is that ODR type graph is built dynamically, starting just with types of
methods. During gimplification of functions,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79931
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 41061
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41061&action=edit
Verification patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80223
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
May I ask you Marek what would be use-case of such attribute? Thanks
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80221
--- Comment #9 from Thomas Schwinge ---
You could further optimize the script to omit "." locations: if the "dg-*"
directive actually is placed on the appropriate line already.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80221
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80232
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78881
--- Comment #17 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #16 from Jerry DeLisle ---
> (In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #15)
>
> Can you change line:
>
> if (imsg.ne."End of record") call abort
>
> to:
>
> if (imsg.ne."End o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80221
--- Comment #10 from Thomas Schwinge ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #7)
> A more robust solution that wouldn't have to subject to a limit would be to
> add an annotation to dg-{error,message,warning} to indicate that the next
> dg-{bo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80223
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
E.g. if you have an application that is usually just busy waiting, waiting for
something to happen, but you're not interested in profiling that function, or
some function runs in a context where it is not saf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80104
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Tue Mar 28 09:01:57 2017
New Revision: 246525
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246525&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix calls.c for a _complex type (PR ipa/80104).
2017-03-28 Martin Liska
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79671
--- Comment #76 from Bernd Edlinger ---
FYI this is also on the same topic:
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2011/n3296.html#US27
Question:
"Related to core issue 1027, consider:
int f() {
union U { double d; } u1, u2;
(int&)u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71922
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80223
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
I see. Simplest solution is to propagate the attribute to callers, or don't
allow inlining between a pair of function one w/ and second w/o the attribute?
Richi?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77498
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|arm-none-eabi |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79671
--- Comment #77 from Jonathan Wakely ---
It was rejected in 2010, but see
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_defects.html#1116 for the later
discussion, and:
"[Adopted at the June, 2016 meeting as document P0137R1.]"
Which Jason al
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78529
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80232
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
--param vect-max-peeling-for-alignment=0 disables peeling for alignment (but
also makes the runtime profitability trigger at 6 loop iterations already).
I suspect gather has a quite high latency and the loo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79418
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80232
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||57796
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80222
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Mar 28 10:10:01 2017
New Revision: 246527
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246527&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-03-28 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/80222
* gim
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80222
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||7.0.1
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biene
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57796
--- Comment #8 from vincenzo Innocente ---
My understanding of the gather latency is that it essentially corresponds to a
load per cacheline: fast if all items are closeby, slower than scalar loads if
items are all in different cachelines. Not su
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80233
Bug ID: 80233
Summary: [7 Regression] ICE in combine_instructions w/ -O2 (and
above)
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47847
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47751
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79671
--- Comment #78 from Bernd Edlinger ---
Ah, adopted is the opposite of rejected, fine.
Does this mean that the boost code is still incorrect,
because it is not using an array of unsigned char ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79671
--- Comment #79 from Jonathan Wakely ---
That's a new change for C++17, and I don't think today's GCC will treat it any
differently if it uses unsigned char[] instead of char[].
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80117
--- Comment #15 from Andreas Schwab ---
Author: schwab
Date: Tue Mar 28 10:29:34 2017
New Revision: 246528
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246528&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Support for Ada on aarch64 with -mabi=ilp32
PR ada/80117
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80232
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
I have (broadwell CPU) with -Ofast -march=native [-mno-avx]
Sparse matmult Mflops: 2481.77(N=1000, nz=5000) -mno-avx
Sparse matmult Mflops: 2043.19(N=1000, nz=5000)
Sparse matmult Mflops: 224
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80233
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45498
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78644
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79671
--- Comment #80 from Bernd Edlinger ---
but they use just: "mutable char data;"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53383
Katsunori Kumatani changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||katsunori.kumatani at gmail
dot co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79671
--- Comment #81 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Bernd Edlinger from comment #80)
> but they use just: "mutable char data;"
No, actually it doesn't, see comment 45. The original testcase that this reprot
came from is https://bugzilla.redhat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80117
--- Comment #16 from Eric Botcazou ---
Feel free to backport it onto the 6 branch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80205
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Tue Mar 28 11:37:22 2017
New Revision: 246530
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246530&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Handle PHI nodes w/o a argument (PR ipa/80205).
2017-03-28 Martin Liska
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80205
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|2017-03-27 00
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80104
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||7.0
Known to fail|7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79993
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80168
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80179
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||error-recovery
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80179
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|error-recovery |
Priority|P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79262
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24012
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79671
--- Comment #82 from Richard Biener ---
Btw, for the attached patch it would fail to handle the case of passing the
aggregate by value and the inliner introducing the aggregate copy:
inline void* operator new(__SIZE_TYPE__, void* __p) { return _
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53383
--- Comment #25 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Katsunori Kumatani from comment #24)
> I think this bug should be reopened because the current behavior is
> restricting.
[...]
I agree. Let's remove this artificial dependency on -msse.
Patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80234
Bug ID: 80234
Summary: ICE in splice_child_die at dwarfout.c:5265
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80234
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80235
Bug ID: 80235
Summary: ICE: coarrays, submodule
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80235
--- Comment #1 from Anton Shterenlikht ---
Created attachment 41064
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41064&action=edit
submodule file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79390
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||6.3.1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80235
--- Comment #2 from Anton Shterenlikht ---
Can be triggered also with gfortran7 directly:
$ gfortran7 -c -fcoarray=lib m.f90
$ gfortran7 -c -fcoarray=lib sm.f90
sm.f90:22:0:
maxfe = size( cgca_pfem_centroid_tmp%r, dim=2 )
internal compiler er
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80236
Bug ID: 80236
Summary: ARM NEON: Crash in std::map
Product: gcc
Version: 6.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80236
--- Comment #1 from Dominik Schmidt ---
Created attachment 41066
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41066&action=edit
part 2 of minimal example: bar.cpp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80236
--- Comment #2 from Dominik Schmidt ---
Created attachment 41067
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41067&action=edit
g++ --version --verbose
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80155
--- Comment #18 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Thomas Preud'homme from comment #17)
> (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #16)
> > On Thu, 23 Mar 2017, thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> > >
> > > Funnily this led back to the Cor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80095
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80236
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80155
--- Comment #19 from Thomas Preud'homme ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #18)
> (In reply to Thomas Preud'homme from comment #17)
> > (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #16)
> > > On Thu, 23 Mar 2017, thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80234
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Component|c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80155
--- Comment #20 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Thomas Preud'homme from comment #19)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #18)
> > (In reply to Thomas Preud'homme from comment #17)
> > > (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #16)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78644
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Mar 28 13:57:43 2017
New Revision: 246534
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246534&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-03-28 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/78644
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78542
Bug 78542 depends on bug 78644, which changed state.
Bug 78644 Summary: [7 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV in is_gimple_reg_type with -Og
-fipa-cp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78644
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78644
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80117
--- Comment #17 from Andreas Schwab ---
Author: schwab
Date: Tue Mar 28 14:22:29 2017
New Revision: 246536
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246536&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport "Support for Ada on aarch64 with -mabi=ilp32" from trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80225
jwjagersma at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|x86_64-w64-mingw32 |x86_64-w64-mingw32,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80236
--- Comment #4 from Dominik Schmidt ---
AddressSanitizer output:
=
==597==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: stack-buffer-overflow on address 0x7e842bd0 at
pc 0x00013d20 bp 0x7e8428dc sp 0x7e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80236
--- Comment #5 from Dominik Schmidt ---
-fsanitize=undefined does not make any difference.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80236
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Are you using the right libstdc++.so that matches the gcc 6.3.0 compiler?
What does "ldd /tmp/crashTest" show?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80236
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Also please build with -g so the backtraces and stack info are more useful.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70387
--- Comment #5 from jwjagersma at gmail dot com ---
Bumping this, I hope it will be resolved someday.
I found a reference to the same issue, with another test case using posix
signal handlers:
https://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2010-07/msg00195.html
Thi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80221
--- Comment #11 from Martin Sebor ---
That would work too. Yet another possibility is to surround all the dg-message
directives that apply to the same line in a pair of new directives (analogously
to dg-{begin,end}-multiline-output):
foobar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80218
--- Comment #3 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Tue Mar 28 15:14:36 2017
New Revision: 246538
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246538&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR tree-optimization/80218
* tree-call-cdce.c (shrink_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24012
--- Comment #22 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #20)
> Also, I assume this is only a problem for -std=c++98 or -std=gnu++98,
> because if the system headers don't declare those functions for C++11 and
> later di
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24012
--- Comment #23 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Created attachment 41068
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41068&action=edit
Use dynamic checks for C99 functions
This fixes it and passes the testsuite on GNU/Linux and FreeBSD 11.0-R
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78881
--- Comment #18 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #17)
>
> ro@colima 27 >
> LD_LIBRARY_PATH=../../../sparc-sun-solaris2.12/sparcv9/libgfortran/.libs
> ./dtio_26.exe
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80237
Bug ID: 80237
Summary: float to double conversion is not optimized away
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80137
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78881
--- Comment #19 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #18 from Jerry DeLisle ---
> (In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #17)
>>
>> ro@colima 27 >
>> LD_LIBRARY_PATH=../../../sparc-sun-solaris2.12/sparcv9/l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80211
--- Comment #1 from Vladimir Makarov ---
I can not reproduce it. With the mentioned options I have
warning: implicit declaration of function '__builtin_dfp_dtstsfi_ov'; did you
mean '__builtin_fpclassify`?
The option set has no sense for me to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79671
--- Comment #83 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #81)
> Boost 1.63 has an array of char.
Seems they should change that to unsigned char (or std::byte).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80236
--- Comment #8 from Dominik Schmidt ---
-fsanitize=address -g:
==539==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: stack-buffer-overflow on address 0x7ebcac10 at
pc 0x00013d20 bp 0x7ebca90c sp 0x7ebca904
READ of size 16 at 0x7ebcac10 thread T0
#0 0x13d1f in void
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80137
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Tue Mar 28 16:09:49 2017
New Revision: 246542
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246542&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/80137 use std::nextafter instead of looping
PR libs
1 - 100 of 160 matches
Mail list logo
