[Bug rtl-optimization/80025] New: [5/6/7 Regression] ICE w/ -O2 (-O3, -Ofast) -g -ftracer (infinite recursion in rtx_equal_for_cselib_1)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80025 Bug ID: 80025 Summary: [5/6/7 Regression] ICE w/ -O2 (-O3, -Ofast) -g -ftracer (infinite recursion in rtx_equal_for_cselib_1) Product: gcc Version: 7.0

[Bug tree-optimization/79908] ICE in gimplify_expr (gimplify.c:12155) gimplification failed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79908 Bill Schmidt changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

Re: [PATCH 1/5] testsuite: attr-alloc_size-11.c (PR79356)

On 03/10/2017 10:51 PM, Jeff Law wrote: On 03/10/2017 09:20 AM, Martin Sebor wrote: On 03/10/2017 05:57 AM, Rainer Orth wrote: Hi Segher, On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 11:56:39AM +0100, Rainer Orth wrote: Segher Boessenkool writes: As stated in the PR, this test now

[Bug middle-end/80020] [7 Regression] gcc confused about aligned_alloc argument order

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80020 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch --- Comment #1 from Martin Sebor

[PATCH] correct aligned_alloc argument order (PR 80020)

r243470 decorates standard allocation functions like alloca and malloc with attribute alloc_size. However, in applying the attribute to aligned_alloc I had overlooked that the size argument is the second one and not the first. That oversight has led to __builtin_object_size() reporting the

Re: Target maintainers: doc/install.texi love and care

On Sun, 12 Mar 2017 04:27:26 PDT (-0700), ger...@pfeifer.com wrote: > I noticed that the target-specific sections in doc/install.texi > need a little lover and care. It would be great could you have > a look and streamline/update before the GCC 7 release. I looked at our stuff (RISC-V) and

[Bug ada/80007] --disable-bootstrap with gnat-5 leads to failed gnat-7 build on aarch64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80007 --- Comment #6 from PeteVine --- Turns out it's a miscompilation bug as I was using the same set of C(XX)FLAGS that work fine for those other languages. Removing the -fomit-frame-pointer flag while leaving the rest unchanged (-O3

New German PO file for 'gcc' (version 7.1-b20170226)

Hello, gentle maintainer. This is a message from the Translation Project robot. A revised PO file for textual domain 'gcc' has been submitted by the German team of translators. The file is available at: http://translationproject.org/latest/gcc/de.po (This file, 'gcc-7.1-b20170226.de.po',

Re: [wwwdocs] gcc-8/porting_to.html

On 03/12/2017 02:07 PM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > On Thu, 9 Mar 2017, Thomas Preudhomme wrote: >> JonY: what about the attached patch to document the change of behavior >> of GCC on Windows depending on the configure option used? > > +MinGW issues > + > +GCC on Microsoft Windows can now be

[Bug target/80024] New: nios2: unclear wording "numeric digits" in diagnostic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80024 Bug ID: 80024 Summary: nios2: unclear wording "numeric digits" in diagnostic Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug middle-end/80023] New: missing diagnostic on aligned_alloc with invalid alignment

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80023 Bug ID: 80023 Summary: missing diagnostic on aligned_alloc with invalid alignment Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/80022] New: arc: diagnostic ending in two periods

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80022 Bug ID: 80022 Summary: arc: diagnostic ending in two periods Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target

Re: [wwwdocs] Document in changes.html -fcode-hoisting, -fipa-bit-cp, -fipa-vrp, -fsplit-loops, GCJ removal, x86 ISA additions, -fshrink-wrap-separate etc.

Hi Martin, On Mon, 27 Feb 2017, Martin Sebor wrote: > Sorry to be jumping in so late. I only noticed this bit now. > > I would suggest to say that these new built-ins evaluate to integer > constant expressions when their arguments do. Not all C programmers > are familiar with C++ constexpr so

[Bug target/79868] aarch64: diagnostic "malformed target %s value" not translateable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79868 --- Comment #5 from Roland Illig --- Same for all occurrences of the »pragma_or_attr« variable.

[Bug target/80013] [ms_abi-windows x86-64] A Pointer Size 64-bit Wide or 32-bit Wide?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80013 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/80021] New: untranslateable diagnostic "type variant differs by " #flag "."

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80021 Bug ID: 80021 Summary: untranslateable diagnostic "type variant differs by " #flag "." Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

Diagnostics that should not be translated

Hi, the gcc.pot file currently contains more than 12000 messages to be translated, which is a very high number. Many of these messages are diagnostics, and they can be categorized as follows: * errors in user programs, reported via error () * additional info for internal errors, reported via

PATCH for Re: Release notes for GCC 7?

On Wed, 24 Aug 2016, Richard Biener wrote: > We've been creating those lazily over the last decade. We can change > that, an entry for releasing.html is appreciated then so we don't forget. And here we go, in time for the release of GCC 7 / branching of GCC 8. (Except, this time I went ahead

PATCH for Re: Release notes for GCC 7?

On Wed, 24 Aug 2016, Richard Biener wrote: > We've been creating those lazily over the last decade. We can change > that, an entry for releasing.html is appreciated then so we don't forget. And here we go, in time for the release of GCC 7 / branching of GCC 8. (Except, this time I went ahead

gcc-7-20170312 is now available

Snapshot gcc-7-20170312 is now available on ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/7-20170312/ and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details. This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 7 SVN branch with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk revision

[Bug rtl-optimization/79856] rtl_verify_edges: use internal_error instead of error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79856 --- Comment #4 from Roland Illig --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3) > So maybe we instead want a internal_error_cont () which will not end > compilation. I would be very happy with that.

Re: November 2016 GNU Toolchain Update

On Tue, 15 Nov 2016, Nick Clifton wrote: > That's all for now. Hopefully the next update will be a bit sooner in > arriving. Thanks for that update, Nick. Surely interesting reading. Are you planning another update for March or so? ;-) On Wed, 16 Nov 2016, Joseph Myers wrote: > Many of the GCC

[Bug demangler/70909] Libiberty Demangler segfaults (4)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70909 --- Comment #51 from Mark Wielaard --- (In reply to Mark Wielaard from comment #50) > (In reply to Mark Wielaard from comment #49) > > (In reply to Pedro Alves from comment #48) > > > GDB is released separately from binutils though, and GDB 8.0

[PATCH] libiberty: Initialize d_printing in all cplus_demangle_* functions.

While integrating the d_printing recursion guard change into gdb I noticed we forgot to initialize the demangle_component d_printing field in cplus_demangle_fill_{name,extended_operator,ctor,dtor}. As is done in cplus_demangle_fill_{component,builtin_type,operator}. It happened to work because in

Re: install.texi and sparc-*-linux*

From: Gerald Pfeifer Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 12:39:56 +0100 (CET) > On Sun, 12 Mar 2017, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: >> References to dependencies on really, really old versions of >> binutils (talking 10+ years here) which I think we can remove. >> Let me follow-up with some of you

[Bug middle-end/80020] [7 Regression] gcc confused about aligned_alloc argument order

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80020 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Known to work|

[Bug rtl-optimization/79985] ICE in code_motion_path_driver, at sel-sched.c:6580

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79985 --- Comment #4 from Alexander Monakov --- It might have been nicer to adjust asms themselves, adding inputs/outputs for each global reg, if we must pretend the asms implicitly read/write them. That would allow any subsystem (df, sched-deps,

[Bug libfortran/79956] [7 Regression] many new -Wmaybe-uninitialized warnings with bootstrap-O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79956 --- Comment #24 from Thomas Koenig --- I think the warning about estat is a gcc bug. Here is the function in its entirety: void execute_command_line_i4 (const char *command, GFC_LOGICAL_4 *wait, GFC_INTEGER_4

[Bug middle-end/80020] New: gcc confused about aligned_alloc argument order

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80020 Bug ID: 80020 Summary: gcc confused about aligned_alloc argument order Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug target/80013] [ms_abi-windows x86-64] A Pointer Size 64-bit Wide or 32-bit Wide?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80013 --- Comment #1 from Rudy Y. --- Disassembler 'libcrypto-41.dll' - LibreSSL x64 2.5.1 - compile by Libre developer itself using gnuc compiler ( version 5.4.0? ): xor ecx,ecx /* same as above! */ xor r8d,r8d /* same as above! */

Re: terminology: zero character vs. null character

On Fri, 10 Mar 2017, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote: >> I am currently translating GCC into German. During that, I noticed that >> in some places the term "zero character" means '\0'. The official term >> though is "null character", as per the C standard. > I don't see anything explicit here:

Re: terminology: zero character vs. null character

On Fri, 10 Mar 2017, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote: >> I am currently translating GCC into German. During that, I noticed that >> in some places the term "zero character" means '\0'. The official term >> though is "null character", as per the C standard. > I don't see anything explicit here:

[patch, fortran] Fix PR 79956, part two

Hello world, the attached patch fixes another occurence of PR 79956. In this case, we did sdim = GFC_DESCRIPTOR_RANK (source); .. for (n = 0; n < sdim; n++) { sstride[n] = GFC_DESCRIPTOR_STRIDE(source,n) } Now, we know that sdim can never be zero or

Re: [Patch, libgfortran, committed] Don't use rand_s on CYGWIN

On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 7:26 PM, NightStrike wrote: > On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 6:15 AM, Janne Blomqvist > wrote: >> Don't try to use rand_s on CYGWIN >> >> CYGWIN seems to include _mingw.h and thus __MINGW64_VERSION_MAJOR is >> defined even though

[Bug rtl-optimization/79985] ICE in code_motion_path_driver, at sel-sched.c:6580

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79985 --- Comment #3 from Alexander Monakov --- Since r235809, in df-scan.c:df_insn_refs_collect, there's 3233 if (asm_noperands (PATTERN (insn_info->insn)) >= 0) 3234 for (unsigned i = 0; i < FIRST_PSEUDO_REGISTER; i++) 3235 if

Re: Target maintainers: doc/install.texi love and care

> Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 14:47:42 +0100 > From: Gerald Pfeifer > (May there be further changes to consider for cris-*?) Nothing actively pursued and no news on related issues. brgds, H-P

[Bug fortran/80009] Printing/writing a structure with a real edit descriptor.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80009 --- Comment #6 from Jerry DeLisle --- (In reply to Walt Brainerd from comment #1) > Forgot to add: > > Pls see F08 std 9.6.3(7) 2nd bullet I see: BULLET: If a list item of derived type in a formatted input/output statement is not processed by

Re: [Patch, libgfortran, committed] Don't use rand_s on CYGWIN

o had the same bug fixes the problem. The > testsuite is running right now on this. Testsuite run completed with no change in results: === gfortran Summary === # of expected passes44633 # of unexpected failures55 # of unexpected successes 6 # of expected failures

Re: [patch, fortran] PR39239 reject BIND(C) in EQUIVALENCE

On 03/12/2017 12:29 PM, Nicolas Koenig wrote: Hello everyone, this is my first attempt at a patch. The necessary paperwork for me to contribute is all said & done. I'm looking forward to some more compiler hacking :) Nicolas Here is the changelog: 2017-03-12 Nicolas Koenig

[Bug fortran/80009] Printing/writing a structure with a real edit descriptor.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80009 Jerry DeLisle changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug fortran/78661] [OOP] Namelist output missing object designator under DTIO

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78661 --- Comment #24 from Jerry DeLisle --- I dont think the parent is suppose to emit the Object name. What if there are multiple comments? should be: I dont think the parent is suppose to emit the Object name. What if there are multiple

[Bug fortran/79859] diagnostics: argument quoted twice in "No initializer for allocatable compoonent"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79859 Manuel López-Ibáñez changed: What|Removed |Added CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug fortran/78661] [OOP] Namelist output missing object designator under DTIO

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78661 --- Comment #23 from Jerry DeLisle --- (In reply to janus from comment #22) > (In reply to janus from comment #21) > > The testcase seems to be working properly by now, but unfortunately the > > patch breaks dtio_25.f90 (execution test), i.e.

[Bug fortran/80012] FIXME in diagnostic "%s procedure at %L is already declared as %s procedure" from symbol.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80012 Manuel López-Ibáñez changed: What|Removed |Added CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug target/80019] New: ICE in ix86_vector_duplicate_value, at config/i386/i386.c:42584

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80019 Bug ID: 80019 Summary: ICE in ix86_vector_duplicate_value, at config/i386/i386.c:42584 Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords:

[Bug fortran/78661] [OOP] Namelist output missing object designator under DTIO

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78661 Bug 78661 depends on bug 78854, which changed state. Bug 78854 Summary: [F03] DTIO namelist output not working on internal unit https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78854 What|Removed |Added

[Bug fortran/78854] [F03] DTIO namelist output not working on internal unit

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78854 Jerry DeLisle changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug sanitizer/80018] New: ICE in expand_expr_addr_expr_1, at expr.c:7790 w/ -fsanitize=object-size

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80018 Bug ID: 80018 Summary: ICE in expand_expr_addr_expr_1, at expr.c:7790 w/ -fsanitize=object-size Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords:

[Bug fortran/78854] [F03] DTIO namelist output not working on internal unit

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78854 --- Comment #14 from Jerry DeLisle --- Fixed on trunk.

[Bug fortran/78881] [F03] reading from string with DTIO procedure does not work properly

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78881 Jerry DeLisle changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org

[patch, fortran] PR39239 reject BIND(C) in EQUIVALENCE

Hello everyone, this is my first attempt at a patch. The necessary paperwork for me to contribute is all said & done. I'm looking forward to some more compiler hacking :) Nicolas Here is the changelog: 2017-03-12 Nicolas Koenig PR fortran/39239

[Bug target/80017] New: [5/6/7 Regression] ICE: Max. number of generated reload insns per insn is achieved (90)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80017 Bug ID: 80017 Summary: [5/6/7 Regression] ICE: Max. number of generated reload insns per insn is achieved (90) Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

RE: install.texi and mips-*-*

On Sun, 12 Mar 2017, Moore, Catherine wrote: >> Okay to yank it? > Yes, thank you. Done per the patch below (committed). > I will review the rest of the MIPS doc in install.texi this week. Thank you! Gerald 2017-03-12 Gerald Pfeifer * doc/install.texi

Re: [Patch, libgfortran, committed] Don't use rand_s on CYGWIN

On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 6:15 AM, Janne Blomqvist wrote: > Don't try to use rand_s on CYGWIN > > CYGWIN seems to include _mingw.h and thus __MINGW64_VERSION_MAJOR is > defined even though rand_s is not available. Thus add an extra check > for __CYGWIN__. > > Thanks to

[Bug target/71399] [5/6/7 Regression] 5.3.0 bootstrap comparison failure on arm-linux-gnueabihf

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71399 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at redhat dot com --- Comment #18

[Bug target/71399] [5/6/7 Regression] 5.3.0 bootstrap comparison failure on arm-linux-gnueabihf

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71399 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW

[Bug fortran/78661] [OOP] Namelist output missing object designator under DTIO

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78661 --- Comment #22 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to janus from comment #21) > The testcase seems to be working properly by now, but unfortunately the > patch breaks dtio_25.f90 (execution test), i.e. the test case from PR 78854. What

[Bug c++/80016] New: error is positioned incorrectly

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80016 Bug ID: 80016 Summary: error is positioned incorrectly Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug fortran/39239] Reject SAVEd variables EQUIVALENCEd to a COMMON

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39239 Nicolas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added CC||koenigni at student dot ethz.ch ---

[Bug tree-optimization/80015] New: auto vectorization leave scalar code even if it is unreachable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80015 Bug ID: 80015 Summary: auto vectorization leave scalar code even if it is unreachable Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

RE: install.texi and mips-*-* (was: Target maintainers: doc/install.texi love and care)

> -Original Message- > From: Gerald Pfeifer [mailto:ger...@pfeifer.com] > Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2017 7:38 AM > To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Moore, Catherine > ; Matthew Fortune > > Subject: install.texi and mips-*-* (was: Target

[Bug fortran/78661] [OOP] Namelist output missing object designator under DTIO

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78661 --- Comment #21 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 40953 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40953=edit rebased patch Here is the rebased patch. There was one conflict in libgfortran/io/write.c. The testcase

[Bug fortran/78661] [OOP] Namelist output missing object designator under DTIO

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78661 --- Comment #20 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #19) > > Here is an updated patch, which fixes all wrong-code issues AFAICS. It > > includes improved handling of CLASS-vs-TYPE variables (analogous to PR >

[Bug libfortran/79956] [7 Regression] many new -Wmaybe-uninitialized warnings with bootstrap-O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79956 --- Comment #23 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- (In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #22) > Created attachment 40952 [details] > Patch which may fix reshape > > Hi, does this fix the problem with reshape? Yes. Thank you.

[Bug demangler/70909] Libiberty Demangler segfaults (4)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70909 --- Comment #50 from Mark Wielaard --- (In reply to Mark Wielaard from comment #49) > (In reply to Pedro Alves from comment #48) > > GDB is released separately from binutils though, and GDB 8.0 is going to > > branch very soon. IWBN to have

[Bug fortran/80009] Printing/writing a structure with a real edit descriptor.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80009 --- Comment #4 from Walt Brainerd --- Sorry, I cut the example down one step too many. Please try this one. It works OK without all the stuff related to DTIO. BTW, I didn't mention: this is on Windows 10. module B_write_dt_mod implicit

[Bug demangler/70909] Libiberty Demangler segfaults (4)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70909 --- Comment #49 from Mark Wielaard --- (In reply to Pedro Alves from comment #48) > GDB is released separately from binutils though, and GDB 8.0 is going to > branch very soon. IWBN to have this in the binutils-gdb repo by then. Trying to

[Bug fortran/80009] Printing/writing a structure with a real edit descriptor.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80009 --- Comment #3 from Walt Brainerd --- Sorry, when trying to cut the bug to the smallest problem, I went too far. I will start again. On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 6:52 PM, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr < gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: >

[Bug libfortran/79956] [7 Regression] many new -Wmaybe-uninitialized warnings with bootstrap-O3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79956 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #40944|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug fortran/80011] diagnostics: trailing space in "Implicitly declared"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80011 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/79841] Inconsistent diagnostics in fortran/openmp.c, function check_symbol_not_pointer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79841 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/80010] diagnostics: typo $!

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80010 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[wwwdocs] Add release notes template gcc-8/changes.html

Committed, based on gcc-7/changes.html before that one is trimmed down, with some changes to the intro, formatting (simpler),... Gerald PS: In a follow up commmit I added in the empty environments. Index: gcc-8/changes.html ===

Re: [wwwdocs] gcc-8/porting_to.html

On Thu, 9 Mar 2017, Thomas Preudhomme wrote: JonY: what about the attached patch to document the change of behavior of GCC on Windows depending on the configure option used? +MinGW issues + +GCC on Microsoft Windows can now be configured via +--enable-mingw-wildcard or --disable-mingw-wildcard

Re: [RFC PATCH libiberty] Fix infinite recursion in demangler

On Wed, 2017-03-08 at 09:05 -0500, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > thanks. in case you'd not noticed Ian T's okayed my review. so this is > good to go Thanks. Markus pushed it including the testcases. But there are still two testcase (not added, but attached below) that are still failing (but now

Re: Target maintainers: doc/install.texi love and care

On Sun, 12 Mar 2017, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > Certainly! Thanks. Done thusly; thanks for the quick response, H-P. (May there be further changes to consider for cris-*?) Gerald 2017-03-12 Gerald Pfeifer * doc/install.texi (Specific) : No longer refer

Re: Target maintainers: doc/install.texi love and care

> Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 12:34:25 +0100 (CET) > From: Gerald Pfeifer > On Sun, 12 Mar 2017, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > > References to dependencies on really, really old versions of > > binutils (talking 10+ years here) which I think we can remove. > > Let me follow-up with some

[Bug libstdc++/67578] std::random_device::entropy() always returns 0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67578 Xi Ruoyao changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ryxi at stu dot xidian.edu.cn --- Comment

Design question LWG 2861: basic_string should require that charT match traits::char_type

I'm now working on http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-defects.html#2861 The new wording state is now equivalent to basic_string_view, whose current implementation doesn't bother verifying the requirement, so this code (which as UB) currently compiles just fine: #include #include struct

Re: [PATCH] Don't ICE if the Fortran FE calls some stor-layout.c etc. function that emits warning, -Wpadded fixes (PR fortran/79886)

Hi Jakub, The Fortran FE registers its own format decoder, overriding the default one that handles what the middle-end can emit, e.g. warning (OPT_Wpadded, "padding struct to align %q+D", field); The C/C++ FEs are the only other ones that override the decoder, but they do handle all the specs

[PATCH] Implement LWG 2686, hash

The following is an *untested* patch suggestion, please verify. Notes: My interpretation is that hash should be defined outside of the _GLIBCXX_COMPATIBILITY_CXX0X block, please double-check that course of action. I noticed that the preexisting hash did directly refer to the private members of

[Bug c++/80014] New: [6/7 Regression] Caret missing in error message

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80014 Bug ID: 80014 Summary: [6/7 Regression] Caret missing in error message Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: diagnostic Severity: normal

[v3 PATCH] Implement LWG 2806, Base class of bad_optional_access.

Tested on Linux-x64. 2017-03-12 Ville Voutilainen Implement LWG 2806, Base class of bad_optional_access. * include/std/optional (bad_optional_access): Derive from std::exception. (bad_optional_access::bad_optional_access): Adjust.

install.texi and sparc-*-linux* (was: Target maintainers: doc/install.texi love and care)

On Sun, 12 Mar 2017, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > References to dependencies on really, really old versions of > binutils (talking 10+ years here) which I think we can remove. > Let me follow-up with some of you with concrete suggestions > around that. The section on sparc-*-linux* currently has

install.texi and mips-*-* (was: Target maintainers: doc/install.texi love and care)

On Sun, 12 Mar 2017, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > References to dependencies on really, really old versions of > binutils (talking 10+ years here) which I think we can remove. > Let me follow-up with some of you with concrete suggestions > around that. The mips-*-* currently has this: The

install.texi and i?86-*-linux* (was: Target maintainers: doc/install.texi love and care)

On Sun, 12 Mar 2017, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > References to dependencies on really, really old versions of > binutils (talking 10+ years here) which I think we can remove. > Let me follow-up with some of you with concrete suggestions > around that. The i?86-*-linux* section currently has this:

Re: Target maintainers: doc/install.texi love and care

On Sun, 12 Mar 2017, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > References to dependencies on really, really old versions of > binutils (talking 10+ years here) which I think we can remove. > Let me follow-up with some of you with concrete suggestions > around that. The cris-axis-elf / cris-axis-linux-gnu section

install.texi and avr (was: Target maintainers: doc/install.texi love and care)

On Sun, 12 Mar 2017, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > Also, I'm offering help around one particular aspect I noticed: > > References to dependencies on really, really old versions of > binutils (talking 10+ years here) which I think we can remove. > Let me follow-up with some of you with concrete

install.texi and arm (was: Target maintainers: doc/install.texi love and care)

On Sun, 12 Mar 2017, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > Also, I'm offering help around one particular aspect I noticed: > > References to dependencies on really, really old versions of > binutils (talking 10+ years here) which I think we can remove. > Let me follow-up with some of you with concrete

install.texi and alpha (was: Target maintainers: doc/install.texi love and care)

On Sun, 12 Mar 2017, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > Also, I'm offering help around one particular aspect I noticed: > > References to dependencies on really, really old versions of > binutils (talking 10+ years here) which I think we can remove. > Let me follow-up with some of you with concrete

Target maintainers: doc/install.texi love and care

I noticed that the target-specific sections in doc/install.texi need a little lover and care. It would be great could you have a look and streamline/update before the GCC 7 release. Thanks! Also, I'm offering help around one particular aspect I noticed: References to dependencies on really,

[Bug ada/80007] --disable-bootstrap with gnat-5 leads to failed gnat-7 build on aarch64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80007 --- Comment #5 from PeteVine --- The repeated full ada bootstrap was successful at the same revision, using identical flags and GNAT 5.4.0. On the other hand, the failing build prints two warnings during the ada part: g-debpoo.adb: In function

[doc] install.texi: Simplify binutils requirement note for powerpc-*-*

binutils is another GNU project (and well known and easy to obtain), so linking to ftp.kernel.org feels a little surprising. I simplified this and generally streamlined this note - which luckily is a lot less necessary now then when it was added many moons ago. In fact, do you think we can even

[Bug target/80013] New: [ms_abi-windows x86-64] A Pointer Size 64-bit Wide or 32-bit Wide?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80013 Bug ID: 80013 Summary: [ms_abi-windows x86-64] A Pointer Size 64-bit Wide or 32-bit Wide? Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/69138] Woverflow not triggered for constexpr within template class

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69138 --- Comment #4 from Xi Ruoyao --- Created attachment 40950 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40950=edit Another way to show this bug This test case also exploits this bug. In this lim should be the same as limlong, but g++

[Bug c++/69138] Woverflow not triggered for constexpr within template class

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69138 Xi Ruoyao changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ryxi at stu dot xidian.edu.cn --- Comment

[Bug fortran/80012] New: FIXME in diagnostic "%s procedure at %L is already declared as %s procedure" from symbol.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80012 Bug ID: 80012 Summary: FIXME in diagnostic "%s procedure at %L is already declared as %s procedure" from symbol.c Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug fortran/80011] New: diagnostics: trailing space in "Implicitly declared"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80011 Bug ID: 80011 Summary: diagnostics: trailing space in "Implicitly declared" Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug fortran/80010] New: diagnostics: typo $!

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80010 Bug ID: 80010 Summary: diagnostics: typo $! Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran Assignee: