-pc-linux-gnu --host=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
--target=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu --with-ld=/usr/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-ld
--with-as=/usr/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-as --disable-libstdcxx-pch
--prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-r13-3440-20221021201743-g4cfdaeb2755-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-nobootstrap-amd64
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 13.0.0 20221021 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106111
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106113
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101706
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98709
Bug 98709 depends on bug 101706, which changed state.
Bug 101706 Summary: bool0^bool1^1 -> bool0 == bool1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101706
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106717
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
This works on the trunk as far as I can tell.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107354
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
And even more from https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/#known :
Increment/decrement operator (++/--) not working as expected - a problem with
many variations.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107354
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Plus from https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/ :
Before reporting that GCC compiles your code incorrectly, compile it with gcc
-Wall -Wextra and see whether this shows anything wrong with your code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107354
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107354
Bug ID: 107354
Summary: gcc and clang give different answers for this
arithmetic expression
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106080
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106776
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Leandro Nini from comment #2)
> Oh, now I see it, it wasn't that obvious in the first test. But why is the
> compiler allowed to postpone the store after deleting the pointer? Is there
> some
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106776
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Here is a reduced testcase without any std::map or otherwise:
```
struct matrix_t
{
int* count;
matrix_t() :
count(new int(1)) {}
matrix_t(const matrix_t& p) :
count(p.count) { ++*count; }
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106776
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Before PRE
[/opt/compiler-explorer/gcc-12.2.0/include/c++/12.2.0/bits/stl_tree.h:1061:28]
__position ={v} {CLOBBER(eol)};
[/app/example.cpp:25:62] _4 = [/app/example.cpp:25:10]
&[/app/example.cpp:25:62]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106780
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105562
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vincent.lextrait at gmail dot
com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106790
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||alias
--- Comment #1 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106799
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106764
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.3
Summary|ICE on invalid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107353
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107352
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
Slightly more reduced:
namespace std { struct destroying_delete_t { }; }
struct hh {
virtual ~hh();
static void operator delete(hh* ptr, std::destroying_delete_t)
noexcept;
};
class jj :
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107352
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||12.2.0, 9.1.0
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106821
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
Actually I think all three examples are that other PR.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107353
Bug ID: 107353
Summary: [13 regression] Numerous ICEs after
13-3416-g1d561e1851c466
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106821
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||106221
--- Comment #4 from Andrew
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106821
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 53753
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53753=edit
testcase 3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107353
seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Build||powerpc64le-linux-gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106821
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 53752
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53752=edit
testcase 2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106821
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 53751
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53751=edit
testcase 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106823
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107351
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Sergei Trofimovich from comment #4)
> Attached the build log.
>
> I completely forgot about the fact that I was using gcc source from
> "normalized" filesystem which intentionally resets all
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107352
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Reducing ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105322
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-10-21
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104352
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=107351
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
-DMODULE_VERSION='(700101U)'
Hmm.
The date command is not listed in the build log either (debugging make here is
going to be "hard").
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107351
--- Comment #4 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
Attached the build log.
I completely forgot about the fact that I was using gcc source from
"normalized" filesystem which intentionally resets all timestamps (it's one of
the build modes for my
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107351
--- Comment #3 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
Created attachment 53750
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53750=edit
gcc-13.0.0-build.log.xz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107352
--- Comment #4 from Justus Ranvier ---
This is a commit in the project where the ice manifests:
https://github.com/justusranvier/opentxs/commit/051fccf04492ceccee34062fcb406d1b830b55f6
This is a commit where I confirmed that not using
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107342
--- Comment #2 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Created attachment 53749
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53749=edit
untested patch
I'm sure somebody smarter could handle other shift amounts that are not powers
of 2, but this seems
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107342
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107349
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106933
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu ---
This
diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386-features.cc
b/gcc/config/i386/i386-features.cc
index e357294bc4e..aca34d730a8 100644
--- a/gcc/config/i386/i386-features.cc
+++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386-features.cc
@@
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107351
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107352
--- Comment #2 from Justus Ranvier ---
Created attachment 53748
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53748=edit
another example
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107352
--- Comment #1 from Justus Ranvier ---
Created attachment 53747
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53747=edit
preprocessed source
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107352
Bug ID: 107352
Summary: polymorphic class with destroying delete operator
defined causes internal compiler error
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107351
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-10-21
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107351
Bug ID: 107351
Summary: Bootstrap fails when gcc is built with gcc-13-master:
error: conversion from 'long unsigned int' to
'unsigned int' changes value from '700101' to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100098
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4cfdaeb2755121ac1069f09898def56469b0fb51
commit r13-3440-g4cfdaeb2755121ac1069f09898def56469b0fb51
Author: José Rui Faustino de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100097
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4cfdaeb2755121ac1069f09898def56469b0fb51
commit r13-3440-g4cfdaeb2755121ac1069f09898def56469b0fb51
Author: José Rui Faustino de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107350
Bug ID: 107350
Summary: [OpenMP] linear clause with non-scalar list items
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: openmp
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94845
--- Comment #10 from Tom Tromey ---
See also bug #49130 and bug #49537, which we filed when
gdb hit these same problems.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102241
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107349
Bug ID: 107349
Summary: [13 Regression] ICE in get_va_copy_arg, at
analyzer/varargs.cc:175
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106742
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107322
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5792208f5124f687376f25798668d105d7ddb270
commit r13-3439-g5792208f5124f687376f25798668d105d7ddb270
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106818
--- Comment #12 from Andrew Pinski ---
MIPS also does the correct thing (it has store left/right):
(insn 10 9 11 (set (reg/f:SI 196)
(lo_sum:SI (reg:SI 194)
(symbol_ref:SI ("array") [flags 0x40] )))
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106818
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-10-21
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106818
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 53745
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53745=edit
Testcase
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107295
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107295
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2cc41601d9a948e8d612a21c3b9a44ce0b977747
commit r13-3438-g2cc41601d9a948e8d612a21c3b9a44ce0b977747
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107348
--- Comment #6 from Alejandro Colomar ---
Thanks!
Maybe a working __builtin_classify_type2() would be useful... Maybe not...
BTW, maybe it's worth checking all the code in gcc that is comparing the result
against 14, and see if it should be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107348
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Most likely. I think char_type_class, function_type_class, method_type_class,
string_type_class most likely too (function and methods also decay to pointers
to pointer to members), string has the same
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107022
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
For the example in comment 0 the default-initializer for things_{} is the
problem, removing the {} allows it to compile.
For the example in Bug 107340 the problem is the default-initializer x = 0 in
the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107348
--- Comment #4 from Alejandro Colomar ---
Hmm. Then I wonder if array_type_class is being used at all, or if it's unused
code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107348
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Most of the builtins don't do such special magic.
It is true that some, mostly newer added, builtins do have such magic, but I
think __builtin_classify_type is one of the first builtins added to GCC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107348
--- Comment #2 from Alejandro Colomar ---
Being a builtin, I expected that you could just do "compiler magic" to avoid
the decay.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107348
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107348
Bug ID: 107348
Summary: documentation: __builtin_classify_type() undocumented
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107336
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107336
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5076eefe23b96279e34351a2a044858bae3251ae
commit r10-11052-g5076eefe23b96279e34351a2a044858bae3251ae
Author: Eric Botcazou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107022
--- Comment #8 from Jens Maurer ---
I understand we're in a tangled web of partially-complete class rules here,
but the standard does give you the expectation that the inner class is complete
at its closing brace:
[class.pre] p2 says:
"A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107176
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
[local count: 1073741824]:
# b_lsm.8_15 = PHI <0(2), _3(3)>
# b_lsm_flag.9_17 = PHI <0(2), 1(3)>
if (b_lsm.8_15 <= 0)
goto ; [89.00%]
else
goto ; [11.00%]
[local count: 955630225]:
_1 = (unsigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107347
Bug ID: 107347
Summary: Sun Studio 12.6 assembler emits "warning: use of DCTI
couples is deprecated" on sparc-sun-solaris2.11
Product: gcc
Version: 12.1.0
Status:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107338
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105421
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105421
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Thomas Schwinge
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b582496f205c1c3517d8415047fd78321f2c1cdf
commit r12-8857-gb582496f205c1c3517d8415047fd78321f2c1cdf
Author: Thomas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105421
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Thomas Schwinge
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:dd2fdf114b59db1b0bfb0de497fc3ab11f034d89
commit r12-8856-gdd2fdf114b59db1b0bfb0de497fc3ab11f034d89
Author: Julian Brown
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107336
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Paprocki ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #6)
> Created attachment 53739 [details]
> Tentative fix
>
> Totally untested.
Tested, confirmed releases/gcc-10 branch with this patch fixes the issue.
Thanks
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100756
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-10-21
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107346
--- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou ---
> I am wondering whether I should try to support this, or bail out of
> vect_check_gather_scatter if pbitpos is not a multiple of BITS_PER_UNIT. The
> latter obviously feels safer.
Probably the way to go
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107346
--- Comment #6 from avieira at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> There are no differences between gnat1 and cc1/cc1plus as far as dumps are
> concerned, e.g. -fdump-tree-optimized creates the .optimized dump.
This was my bad, I'm not used to using cc1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107346
--- Comment #5 from Eric Botcazou ---
> But I am having trouble debugging this as I cant' seem to break on
> vect_recog_bit_insert_pattern and I haven't figured out how to get gnat1 to
> create dumps :(
There are no differences between gnat1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107346
--- Comment #4 from avieira at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Funnily enough, if I transform the Int24 into a 32-bit integer in the testcase
and disable all bitfield lowering just to make sure, I get the same failure. I
tried using __attribute__((packed))
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107346
--- Comment #3 from avieira at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I am wondering whether I should try to support this, or bail out of
vect_check_gather_scatter if pbitpos is not a multiple of BITS_PER_UNIT. The
latter obviously feels safer.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107344
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
I guess the reorg pass has to be simply enhanced to deal with "distorted"
regions, or alternatively those regions need to be protected somehow.
I'm just guessing that jump threading messes things up here?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107346
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|gnat.dg/loop_optimization23 |[13 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107346
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
I think the issue was probably latent and the function assumes that bitfield
accesses are rejected earlier but now are no longer(?). vect_analyze_data_refs
is usually responsible for that, eventually we
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107338
--- Comment #3 from avieira at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Hi Kewen,
I believe you are right. I was waiting for a powerpc machine in the board farm,
but I suspect I can reproduce this with an aarch64 BE target and I should be
able to confirm.
But your
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107340
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
And the standard says it's undefined to use incomplete classes with
unordered_map.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107327
--- Comment #7 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Carlos E from comment #6)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #4)
> > > When you say to attach a preprocessed source, what would be the most
> > > accepted command that I should be running
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102241
Stéphane Massou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||massoustephane at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107346
avieira at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |avieira at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93687
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
LH's patch has been submitted here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-October/603181.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107346
Bug ID: 107346
Summary: gnat.dg/loop_optimization23_pkg.ad failure afer
r13-3413-ge10ca9544632db
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107345
Bug ID: 107345
Summary: - -Wanayzer-null-dereference false positive with
giving weird path infomation
Product: gcc
Version: 12.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107338
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-10-21
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107315
--- Comment #2 from hengxu010 ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
Thank you Andrew, for replying and explain this question very clearly.
Can I ask that do you have any plan to add support for 128bit long double or
just maintain
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107344
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107344
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Thomas Schwinge :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a9de836c2b22f878cff592b96e11c1b95d4d36ee
commit r13-3434-ga9de836c2b22f878cff592b96e11c1b95d4d36ee
Author: Thomas Schwinge
1 - 100 of 132 matches
Mail list logo
