https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66310
--- Comment #20 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #19)
> > Can this be closed.
>
> The problem is not fixed in 32-bit mode.
Dominique, what are you seeing? This is working fine with my system with -m32.
p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84923
Bug ID: 84923
Summary: gcc.dg/attr-weakref-1.c failed on aarch64
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71965
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84615
--- Comment #9 from Janne Blomqvist ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #8)
> Another test that does not require -fdefault-integer-8
>
> module chtest
> contains
> function chararray2string(chararray) result(text)
> characte
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84902
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sat Mar 17 11:12:00 2018
New Revision: 258618
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258618&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/84902
* config/i386/i386.c (initial_ix86_tune_fe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84921
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84811
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The first dump is some gimple dump (*.*t.*, so not cse dump, and the latter one
is without optimizations, I thought you get the ICE only with -O3.
Just do:
rm -rf small.c.*
gcctk -O3 -S -fdump-tree-all small
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71251
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #7 from Alexandre Ol
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71965
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #8 from Alexandre Ol
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84919
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84072
Bug 84072 depends on bug 84574, which changed state.
Bug 84574 Summary: Function return thunks shouldn't be aliased to indirect
branch thunks
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84574
What|Removed |Add
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84574
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84918
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This seems pretty low priority though, there's a lot of output, but all of it
tells you the problem:
42.cc:4:18: note: ‘std::ostream {aka std::basic_ostream}’ is not
derived from ‘std::basic_istream<_Cha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84530
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84072
Bug 84072 depends on bug 84530, which changed state.
Bug 84530 Summary: -mfunction-return=thunk does not work for
simple_return_pop_internal insn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84530
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67796
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84919
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
On the other side, the warning matches the documented behavior and it might be
too difficult to add all the exceptions when we know that the argument will not
be really dereferenced.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84919
--- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
> On the other side, the warning matches the documented behavior and it might
> be too difficult to add all the exceptions when we know that the argument
> will not be re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66310
--- Comment #21 from Harald Anlauf ---
(In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #20)
>program p
> character(kind=1), parameter :: z = 'z'
> integer, parameter :: big = 536870911
> !print *, repeat(z, huge(1_4)/4)
> !pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82992
--- Comment #4 from Harald Anlauf ---
The accepts-invalid also happens for the simpler examples:
subroutine sub (c_int)
use iso_c_binding, only: c_int
end
The NAG compiler complains:
NAG Fortran Compiler Release 6.1(Tozai) Build 6106
Error:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84924
Bug ID: 84924
Summary: Erroneous error in C_F_POINTER
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66310
--- Comment #22 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
For the original test
program p
character :: z = 'z'
print *, repeat(z, huge(1_4))
end
I get
% gfc pr66310.f90 -m32
% ./a.out > zzz
a.out(22882,0xa9b3c1c0) malloc: *** mach_vm_map
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84924
--- Comment #1 from Seth Johnson ---
- Correction in test case: `call dellocate(` should be replaced by
`deallocate(` (but this doesn't affect the behavior or test outcome
- Also note that the Fortran 2003 standard itself includes a structurally
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84925
Bug ID: 84925
Summary: ICE with segfault in __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ (regression
over gcc-7)
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84925
--- Comment #1 from Hannes Hauswedell ---
Created attachment 43693
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43693&action=edit
intermediate file from crash
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84925
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84925
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Started with r251567.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84925
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
template
struct A {
static const int value = 0;
static auto constexpr fn = [] { return __PRETTY_FUNCTION__; };
};
template
int x = A::value;
auto s = x;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84925
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
--- a/gcc/cp/pt.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/pt.c
@@ -12898,7 +12898,7 @@ enclosing_instantiation_of (tree otctx)
for (; flambda_count < lambda_count && fn && LAMBDA_FUNCTION_P (fn);
fn = decl_function_contex
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84924
--- Comment #2 from Harald Anlauf ---
There is no error for -std=f2008ts or -std=2018.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84924
--- Comment #3 from Seth Johnson ---
That's correct, because those standards include TS 29113 which allows arrays to
be referenced. `-std=f2008ts` also works. The problem is that the usage
described is valid Fortran 2003 but is marked otherwise.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84922
Harald Anlauf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gmx dot de
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84926
Bug ID: 84926
Summary: error: inlining failed in call to always_inline
‘_mm_crc32_u64’: target specific option mismatch
_mm_crc32_u64
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79937
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[6/7/8 Regression] ICE in |[6/7 Regression] ICE in
This was originally posted on Stack Overflow:
https://stackoverflow.com/a/49339771/119527
The following program:
#include
static void pshort(short val)
{
printf("0x%hx ", val);
}
int main(void)
{
short A[] = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6};
#define EXP ((short*)((
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84927
Bug ID: 84927
Summary: [7/8 Regressiion] ICE with NSDMI and reference
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84811
--- Comment #17 from Zhendong Su ---
Created attachment 43694
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43694&action=edit
output from "gcctk -O3 -S -fdump-tree-all small.c"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84811
--- Comment #18 from Zhendong Su ---
> and attach small.tar.bz2, that will contain all the dumps.
Jakub, done; please take a look.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84922
--- Comment #2 from William Clodius ---
FWIW I get the same misleading message for other variants of illegal code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84928
Bug ID: 84928
Summary: std::accumulate should move the accumulator argument
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84615
--- Comment #10 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
The following variant without module of the test in comment 8 behaves the same
way
program TestStringTools
character(len=52) :: txt
character(len=1), dimension(52) :: chararr = &
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44032
--- Comment #4 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #3)
> Is this fixed in the same way that bug 44035 was fixed?
No. 44035 was about the inability to fix, 44032 is about the
actual licensing state of the docum
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26061
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |other
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84269
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|C++ FE does not suggest |More suggestions for
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84269
--- Comment #5 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #4)
> And another, as reported at
> https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/84op5c/usability_improvements_in_gcc_8/
> dvtl76x/
>
> > const auto s = strlen("test");
> > w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84889
--- Comment #7 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #5)
> Note to self: need to look at Elm.
http://elm-lang.org/blog/compiler-errors-for-humans
http://elm-lang.org/blog/compilers-as-assistants
On 17/03/18 14:40 -0400, Jonathon Reinhart wrote:
This was originally posted on Stack Overflow:
https://stackoverflow.com/a/49339771/119527
This mailing list is for automated emails from Bugzilla, not for
reporting bugs. Please use Bugzilla to report bugs, as explained at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bu
On Sat, Mar 17, 2018 at 11:40 AM, Jonathon Reinhart
wrote:
> This was originally posted on Stack Overflow:
> https://stackoverflow.com/a/49339771/119527
>
> The following program:
>
> #include
>
> static void pshort(short val)
> {
>printf("0x%hx ", val);
> }
>
> int ma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84928
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This isn't a bug, because that change has only been in the working draft for a
few months, and is not part of any published standard yet.
https://wg21.link/p0616R0
zero/trunk/root-gcc
--enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-werror --enable-multilib
Thread model: posix
gcc version 8.0.1 20180317 (experimental) [trunk revision 258620] (GCC)
$ gcc-trunk -O3 abc.c
during GIMPLE pass: pcom
abc.c: In function ‘fn1’:
abc.c:2:6: internal compiler error: tree check
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66310
--- Comment #23 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Ok I see it.
In fbuf.c (fbuf_alloc):
/* Round up to nearest multiple of the current buffer length. */
newlen = ((u->fbuf->pos + len) / u->fbuf->len + 1) *u->fbuf->len;
u->fbuf->buf = xre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66310
--- Comment #24 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #23)
> Ok I see it.
>
> In fbuf.c (fbuf_alloc):
>
> /* Round up to nearest multiple of the current buffer length. */
> newlen = ((u->fbuf->pos + len) /
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77414
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|NEW
53 matches
Mail list logo