[Bug other/93641] Wrong strncmp and strncasecmp size arguments

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93641 --- Comment #8 from Dominik 'disconnect3d' Czarnota --- (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #7) > if the invoke.texi entry does not need a change, then this should now be > fixed, correct? It would be a good practice to fix the invoke.texi

[Bug c/93640] The write_only and read_write attributes can be mistyped due to invalid strncmp size argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93640 --- Comment #2 from Dominik Czarnota --- Just to clarify, I reported other cases like this in Bug 93641 - Wrong strncmp and strncasecmp size arguments (https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93641).

[Bug other/93641] New: Wrong strncmp and strncasecmp size arguments

: other Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: dominik.b.czarnota+bugzilla at gmail dot com Target Milestone: --- Hello, There are several bugs where `strcnmp` function is used with a string literal and size that doesn't match the string literal length without a null

[Bug c/93640] New: The write_only and read_write attributes can be mistyped due to invalid strncmp size argument

Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: dominik.b.czarnota+bugzilla at gmail dot com Target Milestone: --- Hey, There is a small bug in gcc trunk (which I believe will be gcc 10). The PoC code

[Bug preprocessor/55820] cpp: unterminated argument list invoking macro "BAR" for #include in macro

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55820 --- Comment #3 from Dominik Czarnota --- (In reply to Dominik Czarnota from comment #2) > Six years later this is still unconfirmed :(. Seven*. Oh those off by ones.

[Bug preprocessor/55820] cpp: unterminated argument list invoking macro "BAR" for #include in macro

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55820 Dominik Czarnota changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dominik.b.czarnota+bugzilla

[Bug c++/90885] GCC should warn about 2^16 and 2^32 and 2^64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90885 Dominik Czarnota changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dominik.b.czarnota+bugzilla

[Bug c/88000] Warn when different local vars regs order may produce different and so unsupported code [-Wasm-register-var]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88000 --- Comment #6 from Dominik Czarnota --- (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #5) > Reopening to confirm the part about this warning request at least Yay, thanks. I am happy someone cares about this. It is good to make it less likely that

[Bug c/88000] Different local vars regs order may produce different and so wrong code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88000 Dominik Czarnota changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c/88000] New: Different local vars regs order may produce different and so wrong code

: normal Priority: P3 Component: c Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: dominik.b.czarnota+bugzilla at gmail dot com Target Milestone: --- Depending on the order of two register local variables definition, when compiled with optimizations (-O1 / -O2