https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87485
--- Comment #6 from Arseny Solokha ---
There must be something wrong w/ the way I configure gcc, then. It takes
indefinite time compiling the testcase only at -O2 or -Os and finishes
instantly at any other optimization level. But it also
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88050
--- Comment #3 from Daniel Gutson ---
It is not the same and doesn't cover important cases: for example, the opposite
one, there is a nontrivial copy ctor implementation but there is no nontrivial
dtor. Or even between the special ctors, or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88053
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Nov 16 12:22:48 2018
New Revision: 266206
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266206=gcc=rev
Log:
2018-11-16 Richard Biener
PR testsuite/88053
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88011
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88011
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Nov 16 12:20:05 2018
New Revision: 266205
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266205=gcc=rev
Log:
2018-11-16 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/88011
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87918
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87025
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I think the note in question is from:
if (dump_enabled_p ())
dump_printf_loc (MSG_NOTE, vect_location,
"-->vectorizing phi: %G", phi);
and the failed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86246
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87989
--- Comment #7 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Author: nathan
Date: Fri Nov 16 11:51:51 2018
New Revision: 266204
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266204=gcc=rev
Log:
[PR c++/86246] ICE tsubst explicit operator call
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86246
--- Comment #10 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Author: nathan
Date: Fri Nov 16 11:51:51 2018
New Revision: 266204
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266204=gcc=rev
Log:
[PR c++/86246] ICE tsubst explicit operator call
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87025
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87485
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88046
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87521
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #6)
> Yes, on IRC Bruno already pointed out the problem with the comment 3
> example. That doesn't change my mind, I still think it would be madness for
> an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87521
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Yes, on IRC Bruno already pointed out the problem with the comment 3 example.
That doesn't change my mind, I still think it would be madness for an
defaulted-on-first-declaration trivial destructor to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88050
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Your example doesn't even compile, the destructor is private.
GCC now has -Wdeprecated-copy which warns for this fixed example:
struct Type
{
~Type()
{}
};
int main()
{
Type t;
Type tt = t;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88058
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84044
Arnaud Giersch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arnaud.giersch at free dot fr
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88054
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://sourceware.org/bugz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87039
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #45006|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86487
--- Comment #5 from avieira at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I can confirm the ICE no longer occurs, but I am not entirely convinced the
issue was "fixed" by this. I fear the underlying fault is still there, it is
simply hidden now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86438
Andrew Stubbs changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ams at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88058
Bug ID: 88058
Summary: gcc fails to detect use of out of scope variable ?
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88011
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
Thanks for the testcase!
--- a/test.go.115t.dom2 2018-11-16 10:45:27.663896672 +0100
+++ b/test.go.115t.dom2 2018-11-16 10:46:47.945357195 +0100
@@ -13937,7 +13937,7 @@
LKUP STMT _27 = aWord_58
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88057
Bug ID: 88057
Summary: libdecnumber/decCommon.c:479: use of out of scope
variable
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88048
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88053
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88050
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88053
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Nov 16 09:27:36 2018
New Revision: 266202
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266202=gcc=rev
Log:
2018-11-16 Richard Biener
PR testsuite/88053
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88053
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88055
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
$ ppc64le-linux-gnu-gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=/home/marxin/BIG/bin/ppc64le/dev/shm/buildbot/install/gcc/bin/ppc64le-linux-gnu-gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88056
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82335
--- Comment #1 from pskocik at gmail dot com ---
This problem still persists in gcc 7.3.0. It appears pasting a macro containing
`_Pragma`s into
another macro is what's causing the displacement of the generated `#pragma`s.
I've cleaned up the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88055
--- Comment #1 from Segher Boessenkool ---
It does not fail for me.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88044
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88054
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The comment is bogus, that is the symbol versioning design, the only way how to
stay ABI compatible even with the binaries that were written before the new
symbol version has been introduced. For symbols
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88056
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dannysmith at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88054
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
The problem looks very similar to:
3537 #if SANITIZER_INTERCEPT_REALPATH
3538 INTERCEPTOR(char *, realpath, const char *path, char *resolved_path) {
3539void *ctx;
3540
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88056
Bug ID: 88056
Summary: gcc/config/i386/host-mingw32.c:170: use of out of
scope pointer ?
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87706
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|marxin at gcc dot gnu.org |hubicka at ucw dot cz
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81397
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #4)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #3)
> > As we're staying with Awk, for now I'm planning to work on that.
>
> Missing the word "not" in there?
Yes, I was
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88054
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Apparently i?86 glibc has two fopen entrypoints:
192: 000657d035 FUNCGLOBAL DEFAULT 13 fopen@@GLIBC_2.1
193: 0011ec90 144 FUNCGLOBAL DEFAULT 13 fopen@GLIBC_2.0
and libsanitizer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88015
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88033
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88004
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88054
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88055
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||ppc64le-linux-gnu
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88055
Bug ID: 88055
Summary: ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2305 on ppc64le
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
101 - 148 of 148 matches
Mail list logo
