[Bug c++/97191] ICE In expand_expr_real_1, at expr.c:10234

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97191 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||16994 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski

[Bug c++/96862] -frounding-math -std=c++2a error: '(1.29e+2 * 6.9314718055994529e-1)' is not a constant expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96862 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||glisse at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c++/91099] constexpr vs -frounding-math

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91099 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/96781] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96781 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |INVALID Status|WAITING

[Bug c++/69698] [meta-bug] flexible array members

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69698 Bug 69698 depends on bug 96743, which changed state. Bug 96743 Summary: ICE on flexible array in initializer list using lambdas https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96743 What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/54367] [meta-bug] lambda expressions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54367 Bug 54367 depends on bug 96743, which changed state. Bug 96743 Summary: ICE on flexible array in initializer list using lambdas https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96743 What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/96743] ICE on flexible array in initializer list using lambdas

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96743 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.4 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/96636] ICE in build_value_init_noctor, at cp/init.c:451

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96636 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code --- Comment #3 from

[Bug c++/96636] ICE in build_value_init_noctor, at cp/init.c:451

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96636 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||4.1.2 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski

[Bug c++/87616] Compiler segfaults on dependent templated friend

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87616 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Michael Gorbovitski from comment #2) > Slightly simplified test case (no need for double-argument template): here is one which is valid C++98 which shows even GCC 4.1.2 has the same ICE struct

[Bug c++/87616] Compiler segfaults on dependent templated friend

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87616 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tangyixuan at mail dot dlut.edu.cn ---

[Bug c++/96656] Segmentation fault with make_friend_class

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96656 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2020-08-18 00:00:00 |2021-7-26 Status|NEW

[Bug c++/96553] ICE in unexpected expression ‘__alignof__ (auto:1)’ of kind alignof_expr

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96553 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug c++/96552] GCC accepts "alignas(auto)" in function parameter list

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96552 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/96400] False positive on Wunused-but-set-variable for static constexpr var used in lambda

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96400 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0

[Bug c++/96359] ICE in cxx_eval_logical_expression, at cp/constexpr.c:3875

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96359 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/101596] vect_recog_mulhs_pattern could use incorrect precision to check shift count

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101596 --- Comment #3 from Kewen Lin --- Formal patch has been posted at https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-July/576071.html

[Bug c++/27775] incorrect "ambiguous" error message with multiple inheritance and nested class.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27775 --- Comment #5 from Rich Newman --- (In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #4) > Clang 3.0 also reject this, so I am not sure whether is actually valid, but > the repeated messages are suspicious. > EDG accepts it, and I can see

[Bug tree-optimization/24568] [meta-bug] Missed optimization: trivialization of silly code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24568 Tobias Schlüter changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/101631] gcc permits object reference to object outside of its lifetime during constant evaluation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101631 --- Comment #2 from fsb4000 at yandex dot ru --- Sure. $ g++ -c -std=c++20 -save-temps main.cpp $ g++ -v Using built-in specs. COLLECT_GCC=C:\tools\msys64\mingw64\bin\g++.exe

[Bug c++/44282] fastcall is not mangled at all

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44282 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ondrej.kolacek at centrum dot cz ---

[Bug c++/57227] Two function with identical signature but different calling convention seem to be symbol-encoded by the same string

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57227 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE

[Bug c++/57136] Should redeclaration of class template with function pointer rather than function be an error?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57136 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- clang started to accept this code in clang 10.

[Bug c++/43189] Operator method lookup failure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43189 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug testsuite/100170] Gcc tests gcc.target/powerpc/ppc-{eq, ne}0-1.c fail on Power10

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100170 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Michael Meissner : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5485e820cd0554886af282265198c7433c64c7b9 commit r12-2521-g5485e820cd0554886af282265198c7433c64c7b9 Author: Michael Meissner

[Bug c++/52761] [C++11] Missing diagnostic for opaque unscoped enum declaration without base

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52761 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- clang declared this as a GNU extention :) :2:6: error: redeclaration of already-defined enum 'E' is a GNU extension [-Werror,-Wgnu-redeclared-enum] enum E; // illegal ^ :1:6: note: previous definition

[Bug c++/52618] Explicit template specialization ignores access rights

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52618 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug c++/24926] gcc ignores access level violation for anonymous structs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24926 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kuba at et dot pl --- Comment #7 from

[Bug c++/51716] access to private member possible

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51716 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |5.0 Resolution|---

[Bug c++/55436] g++ compiles invalid code with child class of nested class in template class

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55436 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug tree-optimization/101626] [12 Regression] ICE in verify_sra_access_forest, at tree-sra.c:2376

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101626 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Component|c |tree-optimization CC|

[Bug target/84431] Suboptimal code for masked shifts (x86/x86-64)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84431 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fuz at fuz dot su --- Comment #9 from

[Bug target/66663] gcc misses optimization emits useless test of (a & 31) with 32

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE --- Comment #3 from Andrew

[Bug target/66663] gcc misses optimization emits useless test of (a & 31) with 32

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Target Milestone|---

[Bug tree-optimization/24568] [meta-bug] Missed optimization: trivialization of silly code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24568 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2008-11-22 10:41:24 |2021-7-26 --- Comment #10 from Andrew

[Bug middle-end/19466] [meta-bug] bit-fields are non optimal

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19466 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug tree-optimization/71461] missed optimization in conditional assignment

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71461 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2016-06-09 00:00:00 |2021-7-26 Severity|normal

[Bug target/67510] x86: Faster code is possible for integer absolute value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67510 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug rtl-optimization/70782] zero-initialized long returned by value generates useless stores/loads to the stack

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70782 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-07-26

[Bug tree-optimization/78888] toupper(x) can be assumed not to be in the range 'a' - 'z'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Andrew Macleod : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d5a8c1382718ae084d46ff9b8a26d6b1d0cb684c commit r12-2519-gd5a8c1382718ae084d46ff9b8a26d6b1d0cb684c Author: Andrew MacLeod Date:

[Bug tree-optimization/68136] missed tree-level optimization with redundant computations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68136 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2015-10-28 00:00:00 |2021-7-26 --- Comment #3 from Andrew

[Bug target/48297] Suboptimal optimization of boolean expression addition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48297 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2011-03-28 09:34:02 |2021-7-26 --- Comment #2 from Andrew

[Bug target/63525] unnecessary reloads generated in loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63525 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/11877] gcc should use xor trick with -Os

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11877 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org ---

[Bug rtl-optimization/32629] missing CSE for constant in registers / inefficient memset

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32629 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|NEW

[Bug middle-end/56924] Folding of checks into a range check should check upper boundary

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56924 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug tree-optimization/57186] implement load sinking in loops

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57186 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |5.0 Resolution|---

[Bug target/60826] inefficient code for vector xor on SSE2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60826 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Target Milestone|---

[Bug tree-optimization/56369] Missed opportunity to combine comparisons with zero

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56369 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |7.0 Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/56711] missed optimization for __uint128_t of (unsigned long long)x != x

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56711 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug middle-end/78103] Failure to optimize with __builtin_clzl

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78103 --- Comment #15 from Segher Boessenkool --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #14) > (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #13) > > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10) > > > Unfortunately, it doesn't work for the #c0

[Bug tree-optimization/56610] IPA(-CP) clone materialization fails to cleanup the CFG

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56610 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail||12.0 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug middle-end/78103] Failure to optimize with __builtin_clzl

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78103 --- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek --- (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #13) > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10) > > Unfortunately, it doesn't work for the #c0 testcase, after the combiner > > splitter kicks in, the

[Bug middle-end/54802] Trivial code changes result in different assembly with respect to rotations and bswap.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54802 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- In GCC 5+, we are able to figure out both do bswap.

[Bug middle-end/78103] Failure to optimize with __builtin_clzl

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78103 --- Comment #13 from Segher Boessenkool --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10) > Unfortunately, it doesn't work for the #c0 testcase, after the combiner > splitter kicks in, the combiner doesn't even try that 4 insn combination. It

[Bug tree-optimization/50272] A case that PRE optimization hurts performance

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50272 --- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski --- In GCC 5+ we can get rid of the loop fully (in the reduced testcase).

[Bug tree-optimization/34417] simplify '(x & A) % B' if 'B > A/2'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34417 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2007-12-10 13:40:29 |2021-7-26 --- Comment #3 from Andrew

[Bug c++/101631] gcc permits object reference to object outside of its lifetime during constant evaluation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101631 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Ever confirmed|0

[Bug tree-optimization/30101] missed value numbering optimization (cprop+valnum)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30101 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|---

[Bug tree-optimization/38209] branch optimisation generates worse code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38209 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug middle-end/39744] component references with VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR should be canonicalized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39744 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- Confirmed again: Before FRE: z = 1; _4 = MEM[(struct X *)].y.z; Note fre we are able to do the right thing but dom does not.

[Bug middle-end/52070] missing integer comparison optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52070 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2012-02-01 00:00:00 |2021-7-26

[Bug tree-optimization/34011] Memory load is not eliminated from tight vectorized loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34011 --- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski --- good function: .L3: movdqu (%rdi,%rax), %xmm0 pslld %xmm1, %xmm0 movups %xmm0, (%rsi,%rax) addq$16, %rax cmpq$1024, %rax jne .L3 bad function:

[Bug target/15533] Missed move to partial register

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15533 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- This looks improved in GCC 4.4.7 and above: fn(unsigned short): movzbl a, %edx xorb%al, %al orl %edx, %eax ret

[Bug tree-optimization/51084] bounds checking not optimized to a single comparison

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51084 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2012-01-07 00:00:00 |2021-7-26 --- Comment #2 from Andrew

[Bug middle-end/14842] Another way of expanding a switch statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14842 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Target Milestone|---

[Bug tree-optimization/24696] missing optimization in comparison of results of bit operations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24696 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/26656] Optimization flaw on conditional set of a bit.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26656 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Component|tree-optimization |target Target|

[Bug fortran/101632] NON_RECURSIVE procedure prefix is unsupported. F2018 defaults to recursive procedures.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101632 --- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 51207 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51207=edit Diff that implements F2018 NON_RECURSIVE and makes things recursive by default.

[Bug fortran/101632] NON_RECURSIVE procedure prefix is unsupported. F2018 defaults to recursive procedures.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101632 --- Comment #1 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- F2018 introduced the NON_RECURSIVE prefix for procedures and also made procedures recursive by default. This code is conforming to F2018. module bah contains ! ! non_recursive is

[Bug tree-optimization/50286] Missed optimization, fails to propagate bool

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50286 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2011-12-14 00:00:00 |2021-7-26 --- Comment #2 from Andrew

[Bug fortran/101632] New: NON_RECURSIVE procedure prefix is unsupported. F2018 defaults to recursive procedures.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101632 Bug ID: 101632 Summary: NON_RECURSIVE procedure prefix is unsupported. F2018 defaults to recursive procedures. Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/11877] gcc should use xor trick with -Os

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11877 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jeffreyalaw at gmail dot com ---

[Bug target/41505] GCC choosing poor code sequence for certain stores (x86)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41505 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/11877] gcc should use xor trick with -Os

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11877 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msharov at users dot sourceforge.n

[Bug target/49127] -Os generates constant mov instead of instruction xor and mov when zeroing

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49127 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE

[Bug c++/101631] New: gcc permits object reference to object outside of its lifetime during constant evaluation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101631 Bug ID: 101631 Summary: gcc permits object reference to object outside of its lifetime during constant evaluation Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug preprocessor/101628] Preprocessor errors on extended characters in #if 0 code block

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101628 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- Related to PR 62661 which was closed as invalid. Basically the C++ standard says the tokens inside the #if blocks need to be valid tokens still.

[Bug c/101630] New: ICE with -Wall: in get_constant, at c-family/c-format.c:325

version 12.0.0 20210726 (experimental) [master revision :c09cf6429:124bb55777c280a85d0c72ec13e293a32917a6b9] (GCC) $ cat mutant.c printf(char[][], ...) { printf(printf); } $ gcc-trunk -Wall mutant.c mutant.c:1:12: error: array type has incomplete element type ‘char[]’ 1 | printf(char

[Bug tree-optimization/78888] toupper(x) can be assumed not to be in the range 'a' - 'z'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7 Andrew Macleod changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug tree-optimization/78888] toupper(x) can be assumed not to be in the range 'a' - 'z'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Andrew Macleod : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1ce0b26e6e1e6c348b1d54f1f462a44df6fe47f5 commit r12-2517-g1ce0b26e6e1e6c348b1d54f1f462a44df6fe47f5 Author: Andrew MacLeod Date:

[Bug c++/101629] ICE: in cp_finish_decl, at cp/decl.c:7826

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101629 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/101629] New: ICE: in cp_finish_decl, at cp/decl.c:7826

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101629 Bug ID: 101629 Summary: ICE: in cp_finish_decl, at cp/decl.c:7826 Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug preprocessor/101628] New: Preprocessor errors on extended characters in #if 0 code block

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101628 Bug ID: 101628 Summary: Preprocessor errors on extended characters in #if 0 code block Product: gcc Version: 10.3.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/101627] New: List-directed read with trailing characters after quotes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101627 Bug ID: 101627 Summary: List-directed read with trailing characters after quotes Product: gcc Version: 11.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c/101626] New: [12 Regression] ICE in verify_sra_access_forest, at tree-sra.c:2376

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101626 Bug ID: 101626 Summary: [12 Regression] ICE in verify_sra_access_forest, at tree-sra.c:2376 Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/100440] allocated() gives True for unallocated variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100440 --- Comment #13 from David.Smith at lmu dot edu --- Thanks for working on the bug I reported in May. I am hoping you can give me some information that I can pass on to the users of my open-source software who use gfortran to run it. Can you

[Bug lto/101625] New: ICE in modref_tree::merge with LTO and -m32

fix=/home/tonyb/tmp/gcc/install Thread model: posix Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib gcc version 11.1.1 20210726 (GCC) gcc -std=gnu99 -Os -m32 -Wall -W -Wshadow -Wpointer-arith -Wundef -Wchar-subscripts -Wcomment -Wdeprecated-declarations -Wdisabled-optimization -Wdiv-by-zero -Wfloat-eq

[Bug fortran/101624] New: [9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected tree that contains 'decl with RTL' structure, have 'const_decl' in maybe_optimize_ubsan_ptr_ifn, at sanopt.c:495

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101624 Bug ID: 101624 Summary: [9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected tree that contains 'decl with RTL' structure, have 'const_decl' in maybe_optimize_ubsan_ptr_ifn, at

[Bug target/92713] ICE in libsupc++ building an offload compiler targeting amdgcn-unknown-amdhsa

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92713 --- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus --- "ICE in libsupc++ building an offload compiler targeting amdgcn-unknown-amdhsa" (Subject) I wonder whether that ICE is just because of the lack of exception support and whether it might work when using

[Bug driver/101447] Remove legacy external declarations in toplev.h

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101447 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bf6d414415e14e13be16abf23375160733567d20 commit r12-2512-gbf6d414415e14e13be16abf23375160733567d20 Author: Ashimida Date: Mon Jul 26

[Bug target/101611] AVX2 vector arithmetic shift lowered to scalar unnecessarily

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101611 --- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek --- That is true, but I think even for vector >> scalar and scalar >> scalar shifts it will be quite rare to support logical and not support arithmetic shifts. And on x86, as can be seen in the PR98856 changes,

[Bug target/101611] AVX2 vector arithmetic shift lowered to scalar unnecessarily

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101611 --- Comment #7 from Marc Glisse --- The same strategy to implement arithmetic shift in terms of logical shift works not just for vector>>vector but also vector>>scalar and scalar>>scalar. But it is probably not worth the trouble indeed,

[Bug target/101611] AVX2 vector arithmetic shift lowered to scalar unnecessarily

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101611 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- I think except for x86 it is very unusual to support logical but not arithmetic vector right shifts, are you aware of any other target that suffers from these? Even vector by vector shifts are rare, if my

[Bug target/101611] AVX2 vector arithmetic shift lowered to scalar unnecessarily

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101611 --- Comment #5 from Marc Glisse --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2) > for arithmetic V[24]DImode >> V[24]DImode > logical ((x >> y) ^ (0x8000ULL >> y)) - (0x8000ULL > >> y) > can be used. I guess it would be

[Bug target/101611] AVX2 vector arithmetic shift lowered to scalar unnecessarily

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101611 --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 51205 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51205=edit gcc12-pr101611.patch Full untested fix.

[Bug fortran/100906] Bind(c): failure handling character with len/=1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100906 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug fortran/97046] Bad interaction between lbound/ubound, allocatable arrays and bind(C) subroutine with dimension(..) parameter

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97046 --- Comment #10 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0cbf03689e3e7d9d6002b8e5d159ef3716d0404c commit r12-2511-g0cbf03689e3e7d9d6002b8e5d159ef3716d0404c Author: Tobias Burnus Date:

[Bug fortran/94331] Bind(C) corrupts array descriptors

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94331 --- Comment #14 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0cbf03689e3e7d9d6002b8e5d159ef3716d0404c commit r12-2511-g0cbf03689e3e7d9d6002b8e5d159ef3716d0404c Author: Tobias Burnus Date:

[Bug fortran/94327] Bind(c) argument attributes are incorrectly set

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94327 --- Comment #7 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0cbf03689e3e7d9d6002b8e5d159ef3716d0404c commit r12-2511-g0cbf03689e3e7d9d6002b8e5d159ef3716d0404c Author: Tobias Burnus Date:

  1   2   >