https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85915
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85801
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77565
--- Comment #3 from Michel Morin ---
There is a typo in this PR's Description. Here is a more readable one:
When we enable `typeof` GCC extension (e.g. using `-std=gnu++**` options), we
get strange did-you-mean suggestions.
`typdef int Int;`
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102259
--- Comment #5 from Michel Morin ---
I put a wrong link for Rust's PR.
The correct link is https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/38622 .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102259
--- Comment #4 from Michel Morin ---
I googled and found that Rust and Python had the same issue (and fixed it):
[Rust]
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/38590
(PR: https://github.com/ziglang/zig/pull/6333)
[Python]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102286
--- Comment #2 from Luke Dalessandro ---
Okay, one last simplification for posterity.
constexpr void bar() {
union {
int data[1];
} u;
std::construct_at(u.data, 0);
}
https://godbolt.org/z/r4M3voh6W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20705
Bug 20705 depends on bug 28838, which changed state.
Bug 28838 Summary: LIB_SPECS lacks pthread
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28838
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28838
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95285
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102284
--- Comment #4 from Johel Ernesto Guerrero Peña ---
If there is, I confirmed it's not in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102287
Bug ID: 102287
Summary: optional allocatable array arguments (intent out) of
derived types with allocatable components are not
properly passed to subroutines.
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102286
--- Comment #1 from Luke Dalessandro ---
Oops, slightly reduced testcase, don't think the struct is necessary (just part
of my RL code).
union U {
int data[1];
constexpr U() {} // no active member
};
constexpr bool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96162
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |trivial
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96162
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-checking
Target Milestone|11.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96162
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-09-10
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102286
Bug ID: 102286
Summary: [constexpr] construct_at incorrectly starts union
array lifetime in some cases
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102278
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Can you unuset all *FLAGS env and try that?
The BOOT_CFLAGS="-O0" might be broken and is a full on different issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48552
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mrd at alkemio dot org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22448
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48552
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102278
--- Comment #3 from Piotr Kubaj ---
Created attachment 51436
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51436=edit
build log
The full build log is attached. The used compilation flags and configuration
options are listed there.
To
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102285
--- Comment #4 from Qing Zhao ---
> On Sep 10, 2021, at 5:34 PM, pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
> wrote:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102285
>
> --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
> I wonder if most of these were fixed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36272
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94716
Johel Ernesto Guerrero Peña changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||johelegp at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102267
Johel Ernesto Guerrero Peña changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102285
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
I wonder if most of these were fixed by r12-3447-g79f488de3036a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102154
--- Comment #27 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Hongtao.liu from comment #22)
> > Btw, I think this is a subreg that would be reasonable to handle.
> > It's exactly the kind that x86 would like to allow, (subreg:HF (reg:SI
> > ..) 0).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102154
--- Comment #26 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #24)
> > The expander should never create such code in the first place, it is
> > premature
> > optimisation! At expand time this should be separate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102285
--- Comment #2 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I checked all the listed testing cases with the latest GCC + -g
-ftrivial-auto-var-init=pattern -O2
all passed without issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102285
qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102211
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:57b7c432cce893e1ba60d9b94a9606df6b419379
commit r12-3457-g57b7c432cce893e1ba60d9b94a9606df6b419379
Author: liuhongt
Date: Fri Sep
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102154
--- Comment #25 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:57b7c432cce893e1ba60d9b94a9606df6b419379
commit r12-3457-g57b7c432cce893e1ba60d9b94a9606df6b419379
Author: liuhongt
Date: Fri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102254
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:57b7c432cce893e1ba60d9b94a9606df6b419379
commit r12-3457-g57b7c432cce893e1ba60d9b94a9606df6b419379
Author: liuhongt
Date: Fri Sep
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102285
Bug ID: 102285
Summary: New flag -ftrivial-auto-var-init=zero causes many
crashes in the testsuite
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85130
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102284
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
I think there might be a dup of this bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102284
--- Comment #2 from Johel Ernesto Guerrero Peña ---
Fixed that: https://godbolt.org/z/YGf4GTP5P.
```C++
struct X { constexpr ~X() { } };
int main() {
[]() consteval {
X x{};
x.~X();
}();
}
```
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102284
--- Comment #1 from Johel Ernesto Guerrero Peña ---
There's also https://eel.is/c++draft/basic.life#9.sentence-1 to consider.
See https://godbolt.org/z/P97Kaqhv8.
```C++
struct X { int x; };
int main() {
[]() consteval {
X x{};
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102284
Bug ID: 102284
Summary: Can access object outside of its lifetime during
constant evaluation
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97612
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97612
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:19f2f22d59f4a3a7e246d09be11a727cffb8badc
commit r9-9722-g19f2f22d59f4a3a7e246d09be11a727cffb8badc
Author: Paul Thomas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97612
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:80b1492b2de153f4850a32cafcd8f4d37c2c84fc
commit r10-10111-g80b1492b2de153f4850a32cafcd8f4d37c2c84fc
Author: Paul Thomas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98565
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:755299ea93dd064ab5ec1027a34f30ca2d908f4c
commit r10-10110-g755299ea93dd064ab5ec1027a34f30ca2d908f4c
Author: Paul Thomas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98565
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98565
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5bb6119070a7aab95dad3bcf3cdf8ac2bc818488
commit r9-9721-g5bb6119070a7aab95dad3bcf3cdf8ac2bc818488
Author: Paul Thomas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102259
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Michel Morin from comment #2)
> Whoa, darwin's (and FreeBSD's too?) `read(…, …, nbyte)` fails when nbyte >=
> 2^31! This is the culprit, I think.
>
> I also found the following description in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97694
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97723
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97694
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:25d45b5dd41a9ab005a5ae8ee8e54be17f2467a2
commit r10-10109-g25d45b5dd41a9ab005a5ae8ee8e54be17f2467a2
Author: Paul Thomas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97723
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:25d45b5dd41a9ab005a5ae8ee8e54be17f2467a2
commit r10-10109-g25d45b5dd41a9ab005a5ae8ee8e54be17f2467a2
Author: Paul Thomas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87477
Bug 87477 depends on bug 93701, which changed state.
Bug 93701 Summary: ICE on associate of wrongly accessed array
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93701
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93701
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93701
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:acfdc0b662e8ed7d850ef42215b2436df720ca5f
commit r9-9720-gacfdc0b662e8ed7d850ef42215b2436df720ca5f
Author: Paul Thomas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96184
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|9.5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93701
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:56defe319186a21dc37e50db8d71185bce332506
commit r10-10108-g56defe319186a21dc37e50db8d71185bce332506
Author: Paul Thomas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98472
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98472
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c101105e7852a940f967137f6b9e0a97d7f2c3c3
commit r9-9719-gc101105e7852a940f967137f6b9e0a97d7f2c3c3
Author: Paul Thomas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98472
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0a79a5457a1a982dd05b8ae33e1320d040a20ccd
commit r10-10107-g0a79a5457a1a982dd05b8ae33e1320d040a20ccd
Author: Paul Thomas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102278
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100110
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=100110
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f692856517393d60f745f20306173919e18fc71a
commit r9-9718-gf692856517393d60f745f20306173919e18fc71a
Author: Paul Thomas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102278
--- Comment #1 from Piotr Kubaj ---
The full error with the command line executed is:
/wrkdirs/usr/ports/lang/gcc12-devel/work/.build/./gcc/xgcc
-B/wrkdirs/usr/ports/lang/gcc12-devel/work/.build/./gcc/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100110
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:714b85f6fce0448b9d4d5e5d21152a3478b27422
commit r10-10106-g714b85f6fce0448b9d4d5e5d21152a3478b27422
Author: Paul Thomas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102283
Bug ID: 102283
Summary: Inconsistent/wrong overload resolution when using an
initializer list and a defaulted template parameter
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.1
Status:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102282
Bug ID: 102282
Summary: New test cases in r12-3320 fail
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: testsuite
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102281
Bug ID: 102281
Summary: -ftrivial-auto-var-init=zero causes ice
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102280
--- Comment #2 from Joe Loser ---
Sorry, typo in previous comment. The `span` range deduction guide should
constrain on `ranges::contiguous_range`, not `contiguous_iterator` concept --
sorry. This is from P1394 (https://wg21.link/p1394).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102280
--- Comment #1 from Joe Loser ---
`span` has a range deduction guide, but it is not properly constrained for
ranges satisfying `contiguous_iterator` concept only at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102280
Bug ID: 102280
Summary: span'
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102279
--- Comment #3 from Richard Earnshaw ---
(In reply to Will from comment #2)
> Thanks Richard! This is obviously a gap in my knowledge I need to fill in.
The aliasing rules say (in essence) that a pointer to an object of type T1
cannot point
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102279
Will changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40505
--- Comment #10 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
The ICE doesn't occur with g++-8, g++-9, g++-10 or g++-11, so I think this bug
can be closed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102279
--- Comment #1 from Richard Earnshaw ---
Looks to me like this code violates the aliasing rules. Compiling with
-fno-strict-aliasing looks generate what your are expecting (although your
expectations are wrong by the C standard).
Oddly,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102279
Bug ID: 102279
Summary: Bad codegen with ILP32, packed struct field pointer,
static variable
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102270
--- Comment #2 from 康桓瑋 ---
In addition, the uses-allocator construction version also missing constexpr
specifier, but I don't know if this is intentional.
#include
#include
struct O {
using allocator_type = std::allocator;
O() =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102273
qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102278
Bug ID: 102278
Summary: Fails to build on powerpc-unknown-freebsd since
20210801 snapshot
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102277
Bug ID: 102277
Summary: hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.23 bootstrap comparison failure
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62051
--- Comment #27 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #26)
> That is Base and Derived in the shared library and the main program are
> considered two different classes because of -fvisibility=hidden and the
> classes are
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102269
qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102276
Bug ID: 102276
Summary: -ftrivial-auto-var-init fails to initialize a
variable, causes a spurious warning
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102275
Bug ID: 102275
Summary: Assumed rank, unlimited polymorphic pointer gives
incorrect behavious
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97352
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101711
--- Comment #11 from bootmgr at 163 dot com ---
(In reply to ctice from comment #10)
> I have been trying off-and-on for the last 3 weeks to build a ming64 GCC
> cross-compiler, on my x86_64 linux ELF system, and I have not been able to
> do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102273
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102273
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:79f488de3036a4a4be08df2a782e6eb02419db19
commit r12-3447-g79f488de3036a4a4be08df2a782e6eb02419db19
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102274
Bug ID: 102274
Summary: aarch64: ICE (unrecognizable insn) with
__builtin_aarch64_fmlal_highv2sf
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70867
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101667
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102183
Di Zhao changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95285
--- Comment #17 from Wilco ---
Here is the current medium code model proposal:
https://github.com/ARM-software/abi-aa/pull/107/files
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101655
cqwrteur changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |---
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101655
--- Comment #14 from cqwrteur ---
Created attachment 51433
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51433=edit
config file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101655
--- Comment #13 from cqwrteur ---
Created attachment 51432
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51432=edit
i see the bug again
here are the logs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102273
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100427
--- Comment #5 from cqwrteur ---
actually a lot of dlls are not copied correctly.
libstdc++-6.dll libatomic.dll libquadmath.dll libssp.dll are all copied with 32
bit dlls.
And libgcc_seh.dll is not copied.
I think the copy to bin behavior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102269
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
*** Bug 102271 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102271
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102273
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102273
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
This one is about nested functions:
optimized dump looks like:
;; Function foo (foo, funcdef_no=0, decl_uid=1980, cgraph_uid=2,
symbol_order=1)
struct A foo ()
{
struct FRAME.foo FRAME.0;
struct A e
1 - 100 of 143 matches
Mail list logo
