[Bug c++/115187] [14/15 Regression] ICE when deleting temporary array
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115187 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
[Bug libstdc++/115126] New: TU-local entity exposures in libstdc++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115126
Bug ID: 115126
Summary: TU-local entity exposures in libstdc++
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
I tried compiling this alternate minimal version of module std:
export module std;
extern "C++" {
#include
}
and got a bunch of errors about exposures ([basic.link]/14) , most of which I
think are correct and need to be fixed in the library.
Most are complaining about the __gthread functions which are declared 'static
inline'; uses of these in standard library headers already violate the ODR.
I also see:
/home/jason/s/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/include/shared_mutex:216:5:
error: ‘void std::__shared_mutex_pthread::unlock()’ references internal linkage
entity ‘int std::__glibcxx_rwlock_unlock(pthread_rwlock_t*)’
which seems like the same pattern as the __gthread functions. I would think
all of the above would be fixed by changing 'static inline' to just 'inline'.
/home/jason/s/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/include/future:1516:7:
error: ‘template virtual
std::shared_ptr >
std::__future_base::_Task_state<_Fn, _Alloc, _Res(_Args ...)>::_M_reset()’
references internal linkage entity ‘template std::shared_ptr >
std::__create_task_state(_Fn&&, const _Alloc&)’
This looks like a typo; when __create_task_state was added in r196695, the
ChangeLog referred to it as a member of __future_base (for which declaring it
static would make sense), but it's actually a namespace-scope function.
Presumably it always should have been inline instead of static, if it isn't
going to be a member.
In file included from
/home/jason/s/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/include/memory:78:
/home/jason/s/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/unique_ptr.h:1161:27:
error: ‘template constexpr const bool
std::__is_unique_ptr >’ references internal linkage
entity ‘template constexpr const bool std::__is_unique_ptr<_Tp>’
This last one seems like a compiler bug; the partial specialization is also
TU-local, so this shouldn't be an error. Though the 'static' seems unnecessary
here as well.
[Bug c++/114935] [14/15 regression] Miscompilation of initializer_list in presence of exceptions since r14-1705-g2764335bd336f2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114935 --- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill --- Created attachment 58210 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58210=edit attempt to reduce redundancy A failed attempt to avoid duplicate array cleanups in this case.
[Bug c++/109753] [13/14/15 Regression] pragma GCC target causes std::vector not to compile (always_inline on constructor)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109753 --- Comment #16 from Jason Merrill --- Patch posted: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-May/650439.html
[Bug c++/114935] [14/15 regression] Miscompilation of initializer_list in presence of exceptions since r14-1705-g2764335bd336f2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114935 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED --- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill --- Fixed.
[Bug c++/114935] [14/15 regression] Miscompilation of initializer_list in presence of exceptions since r14-1705-g2764335bd336f2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114935
--- Comment #1 from Jason Merrill ---
Without :
#include
int as;
struct A {
A(const char *) { ++as; }
A(const A&) { ++as; }
~A() { --as; }
};
void __attribute__((noipa))
tata(std::initializer_list init)
{
throw 1;
}
int
main()
{
try { tata({ "foo","bar" }); }
catch (...) { }
if (as != 0) __builtin_abort ();
}
The problem is with the array EH cleanup handling: when we initialize an array
of a type with a non-trivial destructor, such as the backing array for the
initializer_list, we have a cleanup to destroy any constructed elements if a
later constructor throws. But in this case the call to tata is still in that
region. Without the r14-1705 change, we deal with that by disabling the array
cleanup in split_nonconstant_init, but with the change we don't go through
split_nonconstant_init and so we miss disabling the cleanup.
[Bug c++/114935] [14/15 regression] Miscompilation of initializer_list in presence of exceptions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114935 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org Last reconfirmed||2024-05-03 Target Milestone|--- |14.0 Summary|Miscompilation of |[14/15 regression] |initializer_list in presence of |initializer_list in presence of ||exceptions Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
[Bug c++/56427] [C++11] template template parameter template parameter pack that depends on another parameter pack
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56427 Bug 56427 depends on bug 114377, which changed state. Bug 114377 Summary: [13 Regression] GCC crashes on an example of CTAD for alias templates https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114377 What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED
[Bug c++/114377] [13 Regression] GCC crashes on an example of CTAD for alias templates
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114377 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill --- Fixed for 13.3/14.
[Bug c++/113706] c-c++-common/pr103798-2.c FAILs as C++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113706 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #13 from Jason Merrill --- Should be fixed now.
[Bug c++/88323] implement C++20 language features.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88323 --- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill --- I think the goal should be to declare C++20 support no longer experimental in GCC 15, but I probably wouldn't change the default dialect just yet.
[Bug c++/114841] [P0522R0] partial ordering of template template parameters
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114841 --- Comment #1 from Jason Merrill --- Matheus' suggested wording: "When performing deduction such that both A and P are template template params, and A is the template name of a template specialization, instead of just deducing A in that case, we synthesize a new template parameter from A, filling it's parameters with defaults coming from their corresponding template specialization argument."
[Bug c++/114841] [P0522R0] partial ordering of template template parameters
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114841 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2024-04-24 Blocks||114840 Ever confirmed|0 |1 Referenced Bugs: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114840 [Bug 114840] [meta-bug] template template parameters
[Bug c++/114841] New: [P0522R0] partial ordering of template template parameters
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114841
Bug ID: 114841
Summary: [P0522R0] partial ordering of template template
parameters
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 58029
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58029=edit
WIP patch against r8-7277-g515f874faf4562
In the 2016 CWG discussion of making P0522R0 actually work, I proposed the
adjustment that I implemented in r7-5537-g31bfc9b9dd65ec and drafted as
* X is an invented class template with the template parameter
list of A, including default arguments, except that during partial ordering
(14.5.6.2), for each non-parameter-pack template parameter of A, the
corresponding template parameter of X has a default argument which
is compatible with any other template-argument.
In a reply, Richard Smith noted that this would wrongly accept this example:
template struct match2;
template class t1,typename T>
struct match2, typename t1::type > { typedef int type; }; // #5
template class t2,typename T0,typename T1>
struct match2, typename t2::type > { typedef int type; }; //
#6
template struct Q { typedef int type; };
match2, int> m;
and indeed GCC still chooses #6, which is questionable since t1 cannot
reasonably be deduced to be both t2 and t2.
I worked on implementing this in 2017 but never finished.
His alternative suggestion was still to introduce a default argument, but
instead of having it match any other template argument, base the default on the
actual arguments, i.e. T1 or T0. I worked on this for a while in 2017 but
didn't finish. Now that Clang is implementing this
(https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/89807), it would be nice to finish
it up.
[Bug c++/114840] [meta-bug] template template parameters
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114840 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Alias||c++-ttp Ever confirmed|0 |1 CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org Last reconfirmed||2024-04-24 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
[Bug c++/114840] New: [meta-bug] template template parameters
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114840 Bug ID: 114840 Summary: [meta-bug] template template parameters Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: jason at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- Meta-bug for issues with C++ template template parameters.
[Bug c++/114460] [C++26] P3106R1 - Clarifying rules for brace elision in aggregate initialization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114460 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill --- This paper was intended to correct the specification of existing behavior, so no compiler changes should be necessary, but we should verify that.
[Bug c++/90390] [CWG1996] incorrect list initialization behavior for references
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90390 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org Summary|incorrect list |[CWG1996] incorrect list |initialization behavior for |initialization behavior for |references |references CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill --- This is https://wg21.link/cwg1996 ; I think this is a defect in the standard.
[Bug c++/111067] g++.dg/opt/icf{1,2,3}.C tests fail on darwin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111067 --- Comment #12 from Jason Merrill --- (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #11) > SO I suppose the question is do we want to figure out why the opt is failing > (knowing that if it succeeds that is a secondary issue) - or just > dg-xfail-run-if for Darwin? I think we can just disable icf1 on darwin, and not try to merge i and j. It would be nice for icf[23] to work, since those don't involve externally-visible symbols (or even names at all). It would be good to understand what is preventing the optimization in that case.
[Bug c++/111067] g++.dg/opt/icf{1,2,3}.C tests fail on darwin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111067 --- Comment #10 from Jason Merrill --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #8) > (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #7) > > So I am actually asking if the extension actually has any useful meaning? > > For non-darwin, yes, it requests the storage of two initializer lists to be > merged (see the commit msg for r14-1500-g4d935f52b0d5c0). Though that doesn't involve the attribute, and promoting init-lists to static should work fine on darwin. (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #6) > The question then is whether the attribute is supposed to be a non-binding > request or not. > > If it's a non-binding request then the test should be adjusted/unsupported > for this target. It is a non-binding request. And yes, if this optimization is problematic on darwin, we should adjust the test.
[Bug c++/114562] [11/12/13/14 Regression] ICE when trying to bind rvalue reference to lvalue with comma operator and forwarding reference to pointer since r10-7410
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114562 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
[Bug c++/114561] [11/12/13/14 Regression] Comma operator with forwarding reference to pointer raises invalid lvalue required error since r10-7410
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114561 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
[Bug c++/114455] [C++26] P2748R5 - Disallow binding a returned reference to a temporary
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114455 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
[Bug c++/109753] [13/14 Regression] pragma GCC target causes std::vector not to compile (always_inline on constructor)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109753 --- Comment #15 from Jason Merrill --- Created attachment 57706 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57706=edit one approach I tried just making implicit functions respect #pragma target, but that regresses pr105306 due to seeming internal confusion over whether -Ofast or #pragma optimize apply to the implicit ~C. I haven't tracked that down yet.
[Bug c++/109753] [13/14 Regression] pragma GCC target causes std::vector not to compile (always_inline on constructor)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109753 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
[Bug c++/113706] c-c++-common/pr103798-2.c FAILs as C++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113706 --- Comment #10 from Jason Merrill --- Created attachment 57423 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57423=edit patch for GCC 15 Here's a fix, but since this isn't a regression it can wait for stage 1.
[Bug c++/113706] c-c++-common/pr103798-2.c FAILs as C++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113706 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Target Milestone|14.0|15.0 Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
[Bug c++/113706] c-c++-common/pr103798-2.c FAILs as C++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113706 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Component|tree-optimization |c++ CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill --- I think this is a front-end issue.
[Bug c++/113612] [13/14 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV in get_template_info (pt.cc:378) or tree_check (tree.h:3611)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113612 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED --- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill --- Fixed for 13.3/14.
[Bug c++/113612] [13/14 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV in get_template_info (pt.cc:378) or tree_check (tree.h:3611)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113612 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
[Bug c++/107291] [12/13/14 Regression] ICE in build_comparison_op, at cp/method.cc:1461 since r12-4202-g09d886e671f2230a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107291 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED --- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill --- Fixed for 12.4/13.3/14.
[Bug c++/107291] [12/13/14 Regression] ICE in build_comparison_op, at cp/method.cc:1461 since r12-4202-g09d886e671f2230a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107291 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confirmed|0 |1 Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org Last reconfirmed||2024-02-06 Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
[Bug c++/110084] [12/13/14 Regression] defaulted constexpr operator== causes crash
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110084 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill --- Fixed for 12.4/13.3/14.
[Bug c++/109359] [12/13 Regression] Compile-time rounding of double literal to float is incorrect with -frounding-math
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109359 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #14 from Jason Merrill --- Fixed for 12.4/13.3/14.0.
[Bug c++/111286] [12/13/14 Regression] ICE on functional cast empty brace-init-list to const array reference
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111286 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill --- Fixed for 12.4/13.3/14.0.
[Bug c++/109359] [12/13 Regression] Compile-time rounding of double literal to float is incorrect with -frounding-math
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109359 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
[Bug c++/111286] [12/13/14 Regression] ICE on functional cast empty brace-init-list to const array reference
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111286 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
[Bug c++/109359] [12/13 Regression] Compile-time rounding of double literal to float is incorrect with -frounding-math
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109359 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|jason at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Status|ASSIGNED|NEW Summary|[12/13/14 Regression] |[12/13 Regression] |Compile-time rounding of|Compile-time rounding of |double literal to float is |double literal to float is |incorrect with |incorrect with |-frounding-math |-frounding-math --- Comment #9 from Jason Merrill --- This seems to be fixed on trunk. Jakub, can you bisect what fixed it?
[Bug c++/109359] [12/13/14 Regression] Compile-time rounding of double literal to float is incorrect with -frounding-math
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109359 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
[Bug c++/113767] [11/12/13 Regression] Missing Destructor Call with goto and return value
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113767 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED --- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill --- The fix on the branches is just to disable NRV in the presence of backward goto, as the fix on the trunk was too involved to backport. So this testcase no longer puts ss in the return slot in 11/12/13, but instead returns a copy; the extra destructor call is for the copy. It looks mismatched because there's no user-defined copy constructor to add another "Cons" line; adding that makes it look better. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 92407 ***
[Bug c++/92407] Destruction of objects returned from functions skipped by goto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92407 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added CC||joerg.rich...@pdv-fs.de --- Comment #14 from Jason Merrill --- *** Bug 113767 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
[Bug c++/113767] [11/12/13 Regression] Missing Destructor Call with goto and return value
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113767 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1
[Bug c++/113767] [11/12/13 Regression] Missing Destructor Call with goto and return value
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113767 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed||2024-02-05 Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
[Bug c++/110084] [12/13/14 Regression] defaulted constexpr operator== causes crash
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110084 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
[Bug libstdc++/111948] subrange modifies a const size object
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111948 Bug 111948 depends on bug 112439, which changed state. Bug 112439 Summary: [13/14 Regression] Modification of a member overlapping with a [[no_unique_address]] member in the constructor is incorrectly rejected in constant evaluation since r13-160-g967cdbe6629653 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112439 What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED
[Bug c++/112439] [13/14 Regression] Modification of a member overlapping with a [[no_unique_address]] member in the constructor is incorrectly rejected in constant evaluation since r13-160-g967cdbe662
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112439 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill --- Fixed for 13.3/14.
[Bug c++/113638] [13/14 Regression] Array bounds of variable templates are not correctly deduced from initializers since GCC13 inside a decltype/sizeof
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113638 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED --- Comment #9 from Jason Merrill --- Fixed for 13.3/14.
[Bug c++/113360] [13/14 Regression] Truncated constexpr error messages with -std=c++23/26
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113360 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
[Bug c++/112439] [13/14 Regression] Modification of a member overlapping with a [[no_unique_address]] member in the constructor is incorrectly rejected in constant evaluation since r13-160-g967cdbe662
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112439 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
[Bug c++/113638] [13/14 Regression] Array bounds of variable templates are not correctly deduced from initializers since GCC13 inside a decltype/sizeof
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113638 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
[Bug c++/113531] [14 Regression] AddressSanitizer: stack-use-after-scope when iterating over initializer list since r14-1500-g4d935f52b0d5c0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113531
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
Reduced:
#include
void f(int) { }
void g()
{
for (auto i : { 1, 2, 3 })
f (i);
f(42);
}
int main()
{
g();
g();
}
[Bug c++/113531] [14 Regression] AddressSanitizer: stack-use-after-scope when iterating over initializer list since r14-1500-g4d935f52b0d5c0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113531 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org Last reconfirmed||2024-01-30 Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Ever confirmed|0 |1
[Bug c++/112846] [14 Regression] nvptx: 'FAIL: g++.dg/abi/anon6.C -std=c++20 scan-assembler _Z5dummyIXtl8wrapper1IdEtlNS1_Ut_Edi9RightNametlNS2_Ut_Edi9RightNameLd405ec00000000000EEEEEEvv'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112846 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill --- Fixed. I assume you were seeing the issue on nvptx because it doesn't use mangling aliases.
[Bug c++/112846] [14 Regression] nvptx: 'FAIL: g++.dg/abi/anon6.C -std=c++20 scan-assembler _Z5dummyIXtl8wrapper1IdEtlNS1_Ut_Edi9RightNametlNS2_Ut_Edi9RightNameLd405ec00000000000EEEEEEvv'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112846 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2024-01-30 Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confirmed|0 |1
[Bug c++/113451] [14 regression] 32-bit g++.dg/abi/mangle-regparm1a.C FAILs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113451 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED --- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill --- Fixed.
[Bug c++/113451] [14 regression] 32-bit g++.dg/abi/mangle-regparm1a.C FAILs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113451 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Ever confirmed|0 |1 Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org Last reconfirmed||2024-01-30
[Bug c++/81271] gcc/cp/lex.c:116: wrong condition ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81271 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill --- What tool did this warning come from?
[Bug c++/113544] [14 Regression] bogus incomplete type error with dependent data member in local class in generic lambda since r14-278
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113544 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org Status|NEW |RESOLVED --- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill --- Fixed.
[Bug c++/109227] coroutines: ICE in tree check: expected record_type or union_type or qual_union_type, have array_type in build_special_member_call, at cp/call.cc:11067
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109227 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
[Bug c++/113598] [11/12/13/14 Regression] GCC internal compiler error since r0-124275
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113598 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
[Bug bootstrap/105688] GCC breaks build process if bootstrapping a downgraded GCC (was "GCC 11.3 doesn't build with the GNU gold linker (version 2.37-27.fc36) 1.16: libstdc++.so.6: version `GLIBCXX_3.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105688 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill ||a/show_bug.cgi?id=87858 --- Comment #47 from Jason Merrill --- Also see https://gcc.gnu.org/legacy-ml/gcc/2012-06/msg00325.html for an argument to stop adding the target libs to LD_LIBRARY_PATH entirely.
[Bug c++/113088] [12/13 Regression] Segmentation fault with empty try/catch following try/catch with returns + noexcept destructor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113088 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED --- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill --- Fixed for 12.4/13.3.
[Bug c++/103185] [11/12/13 Regression] ind[arr] is rejected when arr is an array prvalue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103185 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED --- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill --- Fixed for 11.5/12.4/13.3.
[Bug c++/113347] [12/13 Regression] ICE during gimplification building TVM since r13-8079-gd237e7b291ff52
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113347 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED --- Comment #13 from Jason Merrill --- Fixed for 12.4/13.3.
[Bug bootstrap/105688] GCC breaks build process if bootstrapping a downgraded GCC (was "GCC 11.3 doesn't build with the GNU gold linker (version 2.37-27.fc36) 1.16: libstdc++.so.6: version `GLIBCXX_3.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105688 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill ||a/show_bug.cgi?id=41818 CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #46 from Jason Merrill --- The problematic line in the toplevel Makefile is $(RPATH_ENVVAR)=`echo "$(TARGET_LIB_PATH)$$$(RPATH_ENVVAR)" | sed 's,::*,:,g;s,^:*,,;s,:*$$,,'`; export $(RPATH_ENVVAR); \ The patch for PR22340 moved this from POSTSTAGE1_HOST_EXPORTS to HOST_EXPORTS, but didn't mention that in its ChangeLog. Which extended this issue to stage1 builds as well. The rationale for doing this at all seems to be in order to make a just-built tool find the just-built shared libraries that it links agains, but this also affects pre-built tools that link against other versions of the same libraries. And it doesn't justify adding target libraries in stage1. For bfd/opcodes, it would seem better to set LD_LIBRARY_PATH in exec-tool.in so that it only affects those tools specifically. But if the new gcc links against shared libmpc and such, that won't work, since if we set LD_LIBRARY_PATH for gcc it's also set for the other tools it calls. A fix for various system binutils might be to use exec-tool.in to splice out the build directory from LD_LIBRARY_PATH. But again, that won't help with my system gcc. I'm not sure what the best approach is for stage2+, where you might need to load the previous libstdc++ for just-built tools. I guess the splicing in exec-tool.in would cover that as well, and in that case we don't need to worry about system gcc. For the moment I think I'm just going to propose reverting that bit of the PR22340 fix.
[Bug c++/113347] [12/13 Regression] ICE during gimplification building TVM since r13-8079-gd237e7b291ff52
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113347 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
[Bug c++/89237] Partial specialization incorrectly marked as ambiguous with sizeof(T) narrowing down to bool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89237 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill --- Created attachment 57198 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57198=edit WIP Some WIP for this PR. But looking through IMPLICIT_CONV_EXPR unconditionally breaks some testcases, and I don't want to spend any more time on this non-regression in stage 4.
[Bug c++/67898] rejects-valid on overloaded function as non-type template argument of dependent type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67898 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|12.0|14.0 --- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill --- Apparently I was confused, and my patch was also needed for the original testcase.
[Bug c++/55004] [meta-bug] constexpr issues
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004 Bug 55004 depends on bug 111357, which changed state. Bug 111357 Summary: [11/12/13/14 Regression] __integer_pack fails to work with values of dependent type convertible to integers in noexcept context https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111357 What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED
[Bug c++/111357] [11/12/13/14 Regression] __integer_pack fails to work with values of dependent type convertible to integers in noexcept context
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111357 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #14 from Jason Merrill --- The library pattern is fixed on all branches; the built-in doesn't need to be.
[Bug c++/113498] [14 regression] ICE in GCC trunk: tree check: have using_decl in get_template_info, at cp/pt.cc:357 since r14-6064
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113498 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED --- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill --- Fixed.
[Bug c++/87724] gcc allows narrowing conversions in converted constant expressions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87724 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |INVALID CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org Status|SUSPENDED |RESOLVED --- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill --- The standard has been corrected by P1401 to allow these conversions.
[Bug c++/95564] GCC rejects lambda expression with "noexcept(1+1)"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95564 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org Resolution|--- |INVALID Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED --- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill --- (In reply to Jiang An from comment #3) > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2) > > GCC is inconsitent here. with static_assert and constexpr GCC accepts it (PR > > 87724) while rejects it for noexcept. > > Currently narrowing conversions are still forbidden in noexcept and explicit > specifiers. > > The inconsistency is acknowledged in C++23 (WG21-P1401R5), but it seems that > P1401 is not a DR, as the related CWG 2320 is closed as extension. I don't > know whether we should reject narrowing conversions in static_assert/if > constexpr in earlier modes. Narrowing conversions were fine in earlier standards, it was an accidental change that made them ill-formed, which was fixed. Clang now also rejects the testcase.
[Bug c++/104594] narrowing of -1 to unsigned char not detected with requires concepts
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104594 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|--- |14.0 Assignee|ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #8 from Jason Merrill --- Fixed.
[Bug c++/67898] rejects-valid on overloaded function as non-type template argument of dependent type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67898 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Target Milestone|--- |12.0 Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill --- The original testcase was indeed fixed by the patch for 61355, and Patrick's unrelated testcase in comment 4 is fixed by my commit just now. Closing as fixed in 12, but that only applies to the original testcase.
[Bug c++/112632] [14 Regression] Non-type template parameter created with converting constructor sometimes has original type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112632 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED --- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill --- Fixed for GCC 14.
[Bug c++/112594] Non-type template parameter created with converting constructor sometimes has original type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112594 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone|--- |14.0 --- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill --- Fixed for GCC 14.
[Bug c++/113498] [14 regression] ICE in GCC trunk: tree check: have using_decl in get_template_info, at cp/pt.cc:357 since r14-6064
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113498 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
[Bug c++/112632] [14 Regression] Non-type template parameter created with converting constructor sometimes has original type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112632 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
[Bug c++/113307] fails to diagnose an explicit object parameter to be a function parameter pack
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113307 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |14.0 Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED --- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill --- Fixed.
[Bug libgcc/113403] __builtin_nested_func_ptr_created, __builtin_nested_func_ptr should be dynamically linked by default
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113403 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill --- This seems somewhat similar to the C++ issue that led to introducing STB_GNU_UNIQUE; a DSO keeping its own copy of something that we want to be shared. In the C++ case we were dealing with vague linkage variables that we have no control over, and decided that the first copy that gets loaded is used by all later DSOs, and so it can never be unloaded. Here, we have more control over the definition, and could say that everyone should get it from libgcc_s, as Jakub proposes. Or we could force it to be defined in the executable, so all DSOs will use the copy there. That latter might be another way to handle the STB_GNU_UNIQUE situation: if an executable links against a shared library that defines something STB_GNU_UNIQUE, copy the definition from the library into the executable? That would avoid the dlclose problem.
[Bug c++/113038] [14 regression] Excess errors for g++.dg/modules/hello-1_b.C after r14-6569-gfe54b57728c09a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113038 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED --- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill --- But the regression is fixed.
[Bug c++/103524] [meta-bug] modules issue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103524 Bug 103524 depends on bug 113038, which changed state. Bug 113038 Summary: [14 regression] Excess errors for g++.dg/modules/hello-1_b.C after r14-6569-gfe54b57728c09a https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113038 What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED
[Bug c++/113038] [14 regression] Excess errors for g++.dg/modules/hello-1_b.C after r14-6569-gfe54b57728c09a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113038 --- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill --- Created attachment 57053 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57053=edit second piece and an accompanying patch to allow P1811 redefinition of classes. I think we need to extend this to all redefinitions, especially with -fno-module-lazy
[Bug c++/113038] [14 regression] Excess errors for g++.dg/modules/hello-1_b.C after r14-6569-gfe54b57728c09a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113038 --- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill --- Created attachment 57052 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57052=edit more general approach WIP for GCC 15 this is the beginning of a more general approach to this issue that also handles P1811 include-after-import. More work will be needed.
[Bug c++/53499] Incorrect partial ordering result with member vs non-member
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53499 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |14.0 Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW |RESOLVED --- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill --- Fixed for GCC 14.
[Bug c++/81438] silent bad code generation with computed goto exit from catch block
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81438 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone|--- |14.0 --- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill --- Diagnostic added for GCC 14.
[Bug c++/113191] [11/12/13/14 Regression] Incorrect overload resolution when base class function introduced with a using declaration is more constrained than a function declared in the derived class
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113191 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|11.5|14.0 Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW |RESOLVED --- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill --- Fixed for GCC 14. I don't think this is worth trying to change on release branches.
[Bug c++/113124] g++ should relax designated initialiser rules for trivial classes (read: C structures) and C arrays.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113124 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed||2024-01-11 CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #9 from Jason Merrill --- Doing this for constant initializers for C compatibility makes sense to me. But it isn't just a matter of adjusting the diagnostic, we would also need to actually do the sorting to make the initialization work. Still probably not that much work, but not trivial.
[Bug c++/113038] [14 regression] Excess errors for g++.dg/modules/hello-1_b.C after r14-6569-gfe54b57728c09a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113038 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
[Bug c++/113298] RFE: allow suppressing warnings for void * conversions with -fpermissive
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113298 --- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill --- GCC trunk now lets us associate permerrors with a -W flag, so this would be pretty trivial to do. It's a matter of adding an option to c-family/c.opt and doc/invoke.texi and changing the relevant permerror call to permerror_opt.
[Bug c++/113083] [14 Regression][arm] ICE in fold_convert_loc, at fold-const.cc:2602 since r14-5979-g99d114c15523e0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113083
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #4)
> I wonder if we should refuse to evaluate A::A (this) (returning a pointer)
> into {} (not a pointer).
If the constructor returns a pointer, instead of maybe_constant_value
evaluating A::A (this) to (*this = {}), perhaps it should become (*this = {},
this)?
[Bug c++/106213] -Werror=deprecated-copy-dtor does not trigger warning and error
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106213 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|--- |14.0 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED --- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill --- Fixed for GCC 14.
[Bug middle-end/37722] destructors not called on computed goto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37722 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone|--- |14.0 Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #8 from Jason Merrill --- Warning and documentation added for GCC 14.
[Bug c++/105841] [12 Regression] Change in behavior of CTAD for alias templates
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105841 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|12.4|13.0 Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED --- Comment #14 from Jason Merrill --- This was a big enough change that I lean toward not backporting.
[Bug c++/92407] Destruction of objects returned from functions skipped by goto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92407 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Target Milestone|--- |11.5 --- Comment #12 from Jason Merrill --- Fixed for 11.5/12.4/13.3/14.
[Bug c++/92145] -Wdeprecated-copy false-positive when inheriting base assignment operators
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92145 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.5 Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED --- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill --- Fixed for 11.5/12.
[Bug c++/105221] [11/12 Regression] gcc rejects true ? [](auto) noexcept {} : [](int) {} in C++17+ (works for C++14) since r7-4383-g51dc660315ef83dc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105221 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Target Milestone|11.5|13.0 Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #9 from Jason Merrill --- Fixed in 13. The fix seems a bit risky for backporting, but I'm open to it if there's any interest.
[Bug c++/83264] std::initializer_list with a single element selects the wrong overload
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83264 --- Comment #14 from Jason Merrill --- Pinged CWG again.
[Bug c++/41727] partial specialization of member template of instantiation doesn't work
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41727 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|jason at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
