https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91806
Bug ID: 91806
Summary: error: expansion pattern ‘()’ contains no
parameter packs
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91776
--- Comment #2 from yhr-_-yhr at qq dot com ---
> I think it's BM2837, ie. Cortex-A53. Or did you mean a different Pi?
oops you're right, I just got this pointed out when I showed this post to my
friend. I just copied it from `cat /proc/cpuinfo`.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89557
--- Comment #10 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Jan Ziak (http://atom-symbol.net) from comment #9)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
> > Please provide a compilable testcase.
>
> Done some time ago. Please change the status of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58427
--- Comment #2 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Rose Garcia from comment #1)
> related binutils bugreport:
> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12549#c18
That binutils issue has been fixed; is there anything left for GCC to do?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52593
--- Comment #11 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to David Heidelberger (okias) from comment #10)
> fixed in glibc
so... what still needs to be done from GCC's side then?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18501
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vlad at ispras dot ru
--- Comment #90
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91763
--- Comment #2 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
I see now the fact that we are using exceptions is already being passed. The
problem seems to be that flag_exceptions is set when we read an exception
region from an input function, by lto_init_eh. But
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30277
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91763
--- Comment #1 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
I can recreate this on sparc-sun-solaris2.11 using gas.2.30. It works using
the native assembler. I'm using the native linker.
It works if I #ifdef out these lines in lto-opts.c:
#if 0
/* If debug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91769
--- Comment #5 from Aurelien Jarno ---
(In reply to Dragan Mladjenovic from comment #4)
> Hi,
>
> This fix is propbably nothing more than:
Thanks for the fix. I have just tried it and I confirm it fixes the issue. Note
that when backporting it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58442
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49973
--- Comment #17 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Tue, 17 Sep 2019, lhyatt at gmail dot com wrote:
> In any case, the underlying source of wcwidth() could easily be changed as a
> drop-in replacement so I guess it can also be decided
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49973
--- Comment #16 from Lewis Hyatt ---
Thank you both for the feedback so far. Regarding the use of wcwidth(), one
thing I noticed is that glibc has a much different result than gnulib does, say
for instance emojis return width 2 in the former
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91805
Bug ID: 91805
Summary: Data race in std::locale::classic
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91779
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91803
--- Comment #2 from Bernd Edlinger ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #1)
> I do not think that is a bug in the compiler; after all, the error message
> says that is not valid.
Yes, usually that would not make sense, but __typeof()
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91803
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91779
--- Comment #11 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Also:
Breakpoint 1, 0x08049268 in main ()
(gdb) ni
Char f(Char,double,Char):({'A'},0.2,{'C'})->{'B'}
0x0804926b in main ()
(gdb) p $sp
$5 = (void *) 0xce80
(gdb) set $sp = 0xce74
(gdb) c
Continuing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91804
Bug ID: 91804
Summary: [10 regression] r265398 breaks
gcc.target/powerpc/vec-rlmi-rlnm.c
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91779
--- Comment #10 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #9)
> Created attachment 46893 [details]
> libfi.so.7
This attached library has exactly the same problem.
Put a breakpoint at:
0x08049265 <+341>: pushl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91779
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #46892|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91779
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91803
Bug ID: 91803
Summary: statement-expressions are not allowed in template
arguments
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91781
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91781
--- Comment #5 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ian
Date: Tue Sep 17 20:24:00 2019
New Revision: 275813
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275813=gcc=rev
Log:
PR go/91781
reflect: promote integer closure return to full word
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91791
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90393
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tonvandenheuvel at gmail dot
com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87980
--- Comment #6 from G. Steinmetz ---
Variants that actually compile :
$ cat z3.f90 # with a scalar, x(:) -> x
module m
type t
contains
procedure :: f => g
end type
contains
subroutine g (z, x)
class(t) :: z
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91797
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc64le-unknown-linux-g |powerpc64le-*-*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91300
--- Comment #5 from G. Steinmetz ---
Please ignore comment 4, wrong PR ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91802
Bug ID: 91802
Summary: ICE in mio_name_expr_t, at fortran/module.c:2141
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91300
G. Steinmetz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gs...@t-online.de
--- Comment #4 from G.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87980
G. Steinmetz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gs...@t-online.de
--- Comment #5 from G.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91801
Bug ID: 91801
Summary: ICE in gfc_simplify_reshape, at
fortran/simplify.c:6733
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91800
Bug ID: 91800
Summary: ICE in gfc_code2string(): Bad code
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91799
seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc64le-unknown-linux-g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91799
Bug ID: 91799
Summary: [10 regression] r273245 breaks test case
gcc.target/powerpc/pr88233.c
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91797
--- Comment #1 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
This also affects gcc.target/powerpc/pr87507.c
FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/pr87507.c scan-assembler-times \\mstd\\M 4
FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/pr87507.c scan-assembler-not \\mld\\M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91769
--- Comment #4 from Dragan Mladjenovic ---
Hi,
This fix is propbably nothing more than:
--- a/gcc/config/mips/mips.c
+++ b/gcc/config/mips/mips.c
@@ -4862,7 +4862,7 @@ mips_split_move (rtx dest, rtx src, enum mips_split_type
split_type, rtx
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91779
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91779
--- Comment #6 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Some debugging & tracing throug main shows the following:
There is an indirect call where we enter with stack pointer 0xce60, and
return with a stack pointer of 0xce80. Later, pushl misaligns the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49973
--- Comment #15 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Lewis Hyatt from comment #13)
> I have one other question though. This quick attempt uses wchar.h, namely
> the mbrtowc() and wcwidth() functions. Firstly, it seems unfortunate to
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91758
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91794
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91758
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
> @Eric, @Jakub, @Richard: Aren't we missing something similar with the store
> merging of bool:1 bit fields?
> I can see the cast to 'unsigned char' from 'bool' in GIMPLE. Both should be
> 1B and
> so that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91798
Bug ID: 91798
Summary: Compiler rejects code due to template specialization
of auto parameter value.
Product: gcc
Version: 8.1.0
URL:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91797
Bug ID: 91797
Summary: [10 regression] r273240 breaks test case
gcc.target/powerpc/pr68805.c
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91708
--- Comment #18 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Richard Earnshaw from comment #17)
> So do we have a testcase that shows the problem on older compilers?
Yes, the same testcase shows the same incorrect substitution in older
compilers. I tried GCC9,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91779
--- Comment #5 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #4)
> Please note (reg 116), which is kept alive all the way to (insn 127), where
> it is pushed on stack.
... all the way to (insn 125), ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91779
--- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak ---
As explained in the #Comment 0, we have the following situation in main:
leal.LC164@GOTOFF(%ebx), %eax # 32[c=5 l=6] *leasi
pushl %eax# 33[c=4 l=1] *pushsi2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91269
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91269
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91779
--- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak ---
The test needs -fpie and attached libffi.so.7 (plus a symbolic link from
libffi.so to libffi.so.7).
$gcc -O2 -m32 -fpie -L. -lffi pr91779.i
$ LD_LIBRARY_PATH=. ./a.out
Char
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91779
--- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Created attachment 46892
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46892=edit
libffi.so.7
Needed shared library to run the test.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91791
ensadc at mailnesia dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ensadc at mailnesia dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91758
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
Bonjour Retrouvez-moi sur la page je suis mtn en ligne, mon login: CAT015>
http://bit.ly/2mj0FBr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91737
nsz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91737
--- Comment #4 from Rich Felker ---
The corresponding fixes for libgfortran and libstdc++ were made back in 2015.
>From the converted repo mirror I use, it looks like this was svn revision
222329 but I may be mistaken (really looking forward to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91708
--- Comment #17 from Richard Earnshaw ---
So do we have a testcase that shows the problem on older compilers?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91708
--- Comment #16 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Richard Earnshaw from comment #15)
> So is this now fixed?
On trunk yes. This is quite a nasty alias bug in CSE, so it will need to be
backported.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91737
--- Comment #3 from Rich Felker ---
Please reopen. (I thought I could, but apparently I can't...?) RESOLVED/MOVED
makes no sense. It should either be opened or CLOSED/WONTFIX if the latter is
really going to be gcc's position on this issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91708
--- Comment #15 from Richard Earnshaw ---
So is this now fixed?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91737
Rich Felker changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bugdal at aerifal dot cx
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91772
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Sep 17 13:52:20 2019
New Revision: 275804
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275804=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-09-17 Richard Biener
PR debug/91772
* dwarf2out.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91772
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91794
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 46891
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46891=edit
fixed patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91794
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 46890
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46890=edit
patch for lto-wrapper
This instead makes lto-wrapper append -funwind-tables when one CU had that
enabled.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91758
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
So no, the affective change is:
D.1259546.IndirectRealign = SR.6335_125;
D.1259546.InReg = SR.6336_130;
_163 = (unsigned char) SR.6335_125;
_50 = (unsigned char) SR.6336_130;
_140 = _50 << 1;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91758
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
So that's what I have:
1) reduced LLVM test-case:
$ cat /tmp/llvm-project/clang/test/CodeGen/lanai-regparm.c
void f2(int a) __attribute((regparm(0)));
void f0() {
f2(1);
}
2) I applied the following local
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91796
Bug ID: 91796
Summary: Sub-optimal YMM register allocation.
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91089
--- Comment #3 from fxue at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: fxue
Date: Tue Sep 17 12:30:08 2019
New Revision: 275802
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275802=gcc=rev
Log:
PR ipa/91089 - Setup predicate for switch default case in IPA
2019-09-17
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30277
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ro at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91772
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 46889
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46889=edit
patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91772
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91766
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91795
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91766
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91794
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
So one possible fix would be
Index: gcc/dwarf2cfi.c
===
--- gcc/dwarf2cfi.c (revision 275639)
+++ gcc/dwarf2cfi.c (working copy)
@@
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91794
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||EH, lto
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91795
Bug ID: 91795
Summary: [UBSAN :- error] with combination of flags (shift and
unsigned-integer-overflow)
Product: gcc
Version: 6.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91730
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91794
Bug ID: 91794
Summary: exception and unwind state is not carried to LTO but
controls EH vs debug frame
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58442
coypu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||coypu at sdf dot org
--- Comment #12 from coypu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91793
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91793
--- Comment #2 from Cyp ---
Compiler output from reduced testcase:
---
91793.cpp: In instantiation of ‘ [with auto:1 = {}]’:
91793.cpp:6:4: required from here
91793.cpp:4:25: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91793
--- Comment #1 from Cyp ---
Reduced (creduce) testcase which reproduces ICE:
---
int a(
[](auto... a) {
[] {
using b = decltype(a);
};
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91780
--- Comment #1 from Mikael Persson ---
To clarify it also does not work in gcc trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91588
--- Comment #4 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Tue Sep 17 08:30:50 2019
New Revision: 275800
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275800=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-09-17 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/91588
* expr.c (check_inquiry):
ion of 'main():: [with auto:1 =
{int}]':
/opt/compiler-explorer/gcc-trunk-20190917/include/c++/10.0.0/type_traits:2490:26:
required by substitution of 'template static
std::__result_of_success()((declval<_Args>)()...)),
std::__invoke_other> std::__result_of_other_impl::_S_test(int) [with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91749
Christophe Lyon changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91749
--- Comment #4 from Christophe Lyon ---
Author: clyon
Date: Tue Sep 17 08:13:11 2019
New Revision: 275799
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275799=gcc=rev
Log:
[PR91749][arm] FDPIC: Handle -mflip-thumb
2019-09-16 Christophe Lyon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91705
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cyp561 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #13
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91790
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Sep 17 08:08:40 2019
New Revision: 275798
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275798=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-09-17 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/91790
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91792
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91790
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.0
--- Comment #2 from Richard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91792
Bug ID: 91792
Summary: [9 Regression] constexpr ++ or -- evaluation fails on
float or double
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91268
--- Comment #2 from pmderodat at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: pmderodat
Date: Tue Sep 17 07:59:43 2019
New Revision: 275774
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=275774=gcc=rev
Log:
[Ada] PR ada/91268 Do not redefine macros
This should fix PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91790
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91777
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
So here is the thing. Tracking things via memory is hard.
1 - 100 of 109 matches
Mail list logo
