https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89808
Justin Bassett changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jbassett271 at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99223
--- Comment #4 from Alexander Lelyakin ---
Currently these two sequences produce same error:
internal compiler error: in install_entity, at cp/module.cc:7464
Which is duplicate of 99241.
Should be closed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99222
Alexander Lelyakin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||alexander.lelyakin@googlema
include the complete backtrace with any bug report.
See <https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/> for instructions.
g++ (GCC) 11.0.1 20210330 (experimental)
Copyright (C) 2021 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO
warranty; not even for M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99284
--- Comment #2 from Alexander Lelyakin ---
Not reproduced anymore.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99815
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88115
--- Comment #12 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a3bf6ce7f2e17f2c977c13df23eb718e7b433dcd
commit r11-7921-ga3bf6ce7f2e17f2c977c13df23eb718e7b433dcd
Author: Patrick Palka
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99844
Bug ID: 99844
Summary: ICE: unexpected expression 'B' of kind
template_parm_index
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99815
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0bbf0edbfc782f8e4e416d5fbd1b52a515adb585
commit r11-7920-g0bbf0edbfc782f8e4e416d5fbd1b52a515adb585
Author: Patrick Palka
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99823
--- Comment #2 from apple ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> -funroll-all-loops applies to the RTL loop unroller, the GIMPLE level
> concludes:
>
> Estimating sizes for loop 1
> BB: 3, after_exit: 0
> size: 1 _1 = MEM[(int
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99843
Bug ID: 99843
Summary: Making a function a friend of a class will hide
function constructor priority if has constructor(n)
attribute
Product: gcc
Version: 9.3.1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63660
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
Known to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99831
--- Comment #8 from Marek Polacek ---
The problem is that post-r277865 in defaulted_late_check we call
synthesize_method here:
if (kind == sfk_comparison)
{
/* If the function was declared constexpr, check that the definition
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99718
luoxhu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99445
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99842
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc64le-linux
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99842
Bug ID: 99842
Summary: MMA test case ICEs using -O3
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99790
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7cdd30b43a63832d6f908b2dd64bd19a0817cd7b
commit r10-9626-g7cdd30b43a63832d6f908b2dd64bd19a0817cd7b
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99777
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:afe9a630eae114665e77402ea083201c9d406e99
commit r10-9625-gafe9a630eae114665e77402ea083201c9d406e99
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99334
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f5df18504c1790413f293bfb50d40faa7f1ea860
commit r10-9624-gf5df18504c1790413f293bfb50d40faa7f1ea860
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99705
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1c82b47137ab4212b7618da3458d2949b2dff1a3
commit r10-9623-g1c82b47137ab4212b7618da3458d2949b2dff1a3
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99745
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f8780caf07340f5d5e55cf5fb1b2be07cabab1ea
commit r10-9622-gf8780caf07340f5d5e55cf5fb1b2be07cabab1ea
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99650
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d5e379e3fe19362442b5d0ac608fb8ddf67fecd3
commit r10-9621-gd5e379e3fe19362442b5d0ac608fb8ddf67fecd3
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99388
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d3dd3703f1d42b14c88b91e51a2a775fe00a2974
commit r10-9620-gd3dd3703f1d42b14c88b91e51a2a775fe00a2974
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99588
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b1fc1f1c4b2e9005c40ed476b067577da2d2ce84
commit r10-9619-gb1fc1f1c4b2e9005c40ed476b067577da2d2ce84
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99771
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0f9aa35c79a0fe195d5076375b5794246cf44819
commit r11-7917-g0f9aa35c79a0fe195d5076375b5794246cf44819
Author: David Malcolm
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96264
--- Comment #17 from Vladimir Makarov ---
(In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #16)
> (In reply to seurer from comment #15)
> > It still fails on gcc 10, though
>
> Vlad, can we get this backported to GCC 10? Maybe in time for GCC 10.3?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99833
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99833
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Reduced:
namespace std {
template struct integral_constant {
static constexpr int value = __v;
};
template struct tuple_size;
template struct tuple_element;
template
using __tuple_element_t = typename
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99833
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Build|-std=c++20 |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99427
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99227
Bug 99227 depends on bug 99427, which changed state.
Bug 99427 Summary: [modules] in system headers: non-constant condition for
static assertion
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99427
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99427
--- Comment #4 from Alexander Lelyakin ---
Not reproduced anymore
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99833
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-03-30
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99839
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.5
Summary|ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99841
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99839
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99648
--- Comment #4 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Which RTL do you want to see?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99840
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99648
--- Comment #3 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The assembler isn't that long so here it is (from -Os):
.file "pr71522.c"
.machine power8
.section".text"
.section
priate.
Please include the complete backtrace with any bug report.
See <https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/> for instructions.
g++ (GCC) 11.0.1 20210330 (experimental)
Copyright (C) 2021 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO
warran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99841
--- Comment #2 from g.peterh...@t-online.de ---
That is not the problem. I only made using type = ... and type(x) in the ctor
calls so that I can test different types. You like to throw that out - has no
influence.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99840
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99831
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99828
--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka ---
> Btw, one solution would be to drop __always_inline__ after always-inline
> inlining
> and thus make it reliably not present for IPA inlining.
Removing it would make you to lose those errors, but we can
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99841
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
The question is:
mm_pair_t m{type(1), type(2)};
I think GCC is correct here, type(1) is a temp and it does not bind to a field
directly, it goes through a constructure and therefor the temp goes away
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99831
--- Comment #7 from Marek Polacek ---
There was en error + ICE, but since r11-5752 we only have the ICE.
Looks like the ICE started with r277865.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99496
seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99819
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99841
Bug ID: 99841
Summary: (temporary) refs
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99831
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
Even shorter:
// PR c++/99831
template struct S {
constexpr S(const char ()[N]) : value{} { }
char value[N];
};
template struct string {
constexpr bool operator==(const string &) const = default;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99817
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99781
--- Comment #5 from Vladimir Makarov ---
I've reproduced it too and started to work on it. I hope the fix will be ready
this week.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99828
--- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On March 30, 2021 7:44:56 PM GMT+02:00, andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org
wrote:
>https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99828
>
>--- Comment #3 from Andi Kleen ---
>So what do you want to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99831
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-reduction |
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99840
Bug ID: 99840
Summary: [9/10/11 Regression] ICE in gfc_simplify_matmul, at
fortran/simplify.c:4777
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99839
Bug ID: 99839
Summary: ICE in inline_matmul_assign, at
fortran/frontend-passes.c:4234
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99838
Bug ID: 99838
Summary: ICE in gfc_format_decoder, at fortran/error.c:970
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99837
G. Steinmetz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99837
Bug ID: 99837
Summary: ICE in parse_associate, at fortran/parse.c:4780
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96264
--- Comment #16 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to seurer from comment #15)
> It still fails on gcc 10, though
Vlad, can we get this backported to GCC 10? Maybe in time for GCC 10.3?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99836
Bug ID: 99836
Summary: aarch64: -fpatchable-function-entry=N[,0] should place
.cfi_startproc before NOPs
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99828
--- Comment #3 from Andi Kleen ---
So what do you want to fix in the kernel?
Use a wrapper for taking the address of the memcpy?
(I hope nothing in gcc would remove such a wrapper)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99831
--- Comment #4 from 康桓瑋 ---
When the array subscript is outside the bounds of array, gcc seems to fall into
infinite recursion due to the default operator==.
Here is the reduced with no header:
struct A {
constexpr A(const char*) {}
char
LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 11.0.1 20210330 (experimental) [master revision
8aac913adfc:ff4ebc2f17c:65374af219f9c5c594951a07e766fe70c1136a1f] (GCC)
[559] %
[559] % gcctk -O1 -S -o O1.s small.c
[560] % gcctk -O3 -S -o O3.s small.c
[561] %
[561] % wc O1.s O3.s
23 45 420 O1.s
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 11.0.1 20210330 (experimental) [master revision
8aac913adfc:ff4ebc2f17c:65374af219f9c5c594951a07e766fe70c1136a1f] (GCC)
[591] %
[591] % gcctk -O2 -S -o O2.s small.c
[592] % gcctk -O3 -S -o O3.s small.c
[593] %
[593] % wc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99833
Bug ID: 99833
Summary: structured binding + if init + generic lambda =
internal compiler error
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98268
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99283
--- Comment #15 from Nathan Sidwell ---
another one encountered on the way ...
* 5f3c6027257 2021-03-30 | c++: duplicate const static members [PR 99283]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99283
--- Comment #14 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathan Sidwell :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5f3c6027257118469a722816e228394b5978ddb0
commit r11-7915-g5f3c6027257118469a722816e228394b5978ddb0
Author: Nathan Sidwell
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61112
--- Comment #9 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #8)
> I've added both the passing test case from comment #0 and the still failing
> test case from comment #5 to the test suite and xfailed the latter (thus
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99790
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8/9/10/11 Regression] |[8/9/10 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60488
--- Comment #9 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #8)
> You're right, the test cases aren't equivalent, or meant to be. What I want
> to highlight is that in the test case in comment #6, in g() and other
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99790
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:953624089be3f51c2ebacba65be8521bf6ae8430
commit r11-7914-g953624089be3f51c2ebacba65be8521bf6ae8430
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99830
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-03-30
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99813
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #50487|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99102
--- Comment #7 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
*** Bug 98917 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98917
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99832
Bug ID: 99832
Summary: std::chrono::system_clock::to_time_t needs ABI tag for
32-bit time_t
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ABI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99813
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Oops, totally missed that.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97536
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99820
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99820
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Kyrylo Tkachov :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c277abd9cd3d10db59f9965d7d6356868da42a9f
commit r11-7913-gc277abd9cd3d10db59f9965d7d6356868da42a9f
Author: Kyrylo Tkachov
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99216
--- Comment #9 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
*** Bug 99252 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99252
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99540
--- Comment #10 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
*** Bug 99560 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99560
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99813
--- Comment #4 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Thanks for looking at this. I agree swapping the constraints for
operand 2 looks like the right fix, and brings it into line with
*add3_aarch64". I think we need to swap operand 1 too
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99377
Boris Kolpackov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98119
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99831
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-reduction
--- Comment #3 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99822
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99822
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Kyrylo Tkachov :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:19199a6f2b0f4ce4b100856c78706d56a16b1956
commit r11-7912-g19199a6f2b0f4ce4b100856c78706d56a16b1956
Author: Kyrylo Tkachov
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99831
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99831
--- Comment #1 from 康桓瑋 ---
Note that if we comment one of the asserts, there will be no problem, or we
just comment the redundant std::ranges::sort.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99781
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99831
Bug ID: 99831
Summary: ICE: in reshape_init, at cp/decl.c:6720
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91799
seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
321-gf64b91568f3-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-aarch64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 11.0.1 20210330 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98125
--- Comment #18 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Another more targeted partial reversion:
2021-03-30 Jakub Jelinek
* targhooks.h (default_print_patchable_function_entry_1): Declare.
* targhooks.c
1 - 100 of 186 matches
Mail list logo
