https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121866
--- Comment #3 from Siarhei Volkau ---
For getting the same effect on 64-bit targets `i` and `len` must be of type
long.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121869
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |16.0
: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: ro at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Target: sparc-sun-solaris2.11
Between 20250905 (6b6a2d461bfd3c81cc35c9989b225845681357cb) and 20250908
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121868
Bug ID: 121868
Summary: Test report for bugzilla issue
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: other
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121830
--- Comment #8 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
> Thanks for the interesting testcases.
You are welcome.
It was another testcase from csmith, which is very useful
for finding problems in compiler backen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121863
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ro at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121867
--- Comment #1 from Jeevitha ---
The modulo reduction for shift amounts in AltiVec’s vec_sl is already
implemented in the GIMPLE folding pass for PowerPC within the
rs6000_gimple_fold_builtin function. However, this folding is restricted by a
ty
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121866
--- Comment #2 from Siarhei Volkau ---
It looks like only 32-bit targets are affected, might be related to pointer
size.
https://godbolt.org/z/z1WdPrWc1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119482
--- Comment #21 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note -O1 completes the testcase in comment #0 in a reasonable amount of time
now. I don't know if it was an issue though.
-O2 still ICEs with checking and flatten.
I was looking at some of the gimple lev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121867
Bug ID: 121867
Summary: PPC: Misses modulo reduction for constant shift in
AltiVec vec_sl
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121866
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|GCC unable to eliminate |GCC unable to eliminate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121866
Bug ID: 121866
Summary: GCC unable to eliminate loop guard in some cases
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121801
--- Comment #5 from Matthias Kretz (Vir) ---
Fixed on trunk. Backports will follow.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121801
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Matthias Kretz :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:19d1c7c28f4fd0557dd868a7a4041b00ceada890
commit r16-3679-g19d1c7c28f4fd0557dd868a7a4041b00ceada890
Author: Matthias Kretz
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121865
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 62349
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=62349&action=edit
modules2.tar.xz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121864
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|ice-on-valid-code |ice-on-invalid-code
--- Comment #2 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121865
Bug ID: 121865
Summary: ICE with modules and LTO (expected template_decl, have
overload in maybe_template_info, at cp/mangle.cc:311)
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: U
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121864
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-09-09
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121864
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> Which means out_stream is also deps_stream .
Because deps_stream has a similar logic above:
if (cpp_opts->deps.style != DEPS_NONE)
{
/* If -M or -MM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121864
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
Dunno why my workstation lost backtraces but whatever, an issue for another
time. Here it is from another machine:
```
in pp_string, at pretty-print.cc:2640
1 | # 0 "a.ii"
0x55c544b42e1a internal_error(char
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121864
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> The ICE is coming from this fatal error:
>
> if (fdeps_stream == deps_stream && fdeps_stream != stdout)
> fatal_error (input_location, "%<-MF%> an
d-now --enable-default-ssp --disable-fixincludes
--with-gxx-libcxx-include-dir=/usr/include/c++/v1 --enable-linker-build-id
--with-build-config='bootstrap-O3 bootstrap-lto'
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 16.0.0 20250908 (experimental)
8cad8f94b450
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111798
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||121364
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121861
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1d1396559e2683c849fb5dba5c8f56f2a4a1ff64
commit r16-3678-g1d1396559e2683c849fb5dba5c8f56f2a4a1ff64
Author: H.J. Lu
Date: Mon Sep 8 13:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121563
--- Comment #18 from Harald van Dijk ---
(In reply to Christopher Bazley from comment #16)
> If I understood you correctly, your very simple general rule is "Multiple
> declarations are valid in file scope and in function scope, so long as they
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121563
--- Comment #19 from Harald van Dijk ---
(In reply to Harald van Dijk from comment #18)
> ...under the current version of your proposed changes, I think
>
> void f(int x; int x) {}
>
> may arguably be an error, despite that being very clearl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121852
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.5
Summary|wrong code at -O2 w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121863
Bug ID: 121863
Summary: Filing new bugs doesn't work
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: other
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121784
--- Comment #4 from Heinrich Schuchardt ---
Hello Andrew,
Thank you for your analysis. I experimented a bit with the type of F in your
reduced example.
These fail:
using F = __attribute__((vector_size(16))) double;
using F = __attribute__((vec
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121544
--- Comment #5 from Jack ---
Thank you Eric!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121863
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120698
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.5
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120698
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d01494e8cf0be5e2cde9f87f7fcaa0e77979957d
commit r13-9875-gd01494e8cf0be5e2cde9f87f7fcaa0e77979957d
Author: Jonathan Wake
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120698
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2d6e59fa8b2893cb6eb6238169d6a20b58605545
commit r14-12009-g2d6e59fa8b2893cb6eb6238169d6a20b58605545
Author: Jonathan Wak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120698
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-15 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a8aa1cda6cb7b7a500f34cafb61d7eba9c619d0c
commit r15-10298-ga8aa1cda6cb7b7a500f34cafb61d7eba9c619d0c
Author: Jonathan Wak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121862
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||14.2.0
Summary|ICE: tree che
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120698
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d199a9c7c5034d0eddb3380a58342a5bcbe6febd
commit r16-3672-gd199a9c7c5034d0eddb3380a58342a5bcbe6febd
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82480
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |anlauf at gcc dot
gnu.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121859
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic, error-recovery,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121862
Bug ID: 121862
Summary: ICE: tree check: accessed elt 1 of 'tree_vec' with 0
elts in expand_template_argument_pack, at
cp/pt.cc:4474
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121861
Bug ID: 121861
Summary: -Os doesn't inline truncf/trunc
Product: gcc
Version: 15.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121860
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121728
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121544
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |16.0
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116600
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xxs_chy at outlook dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121860
Bug ID: 121860
Summary: [16 Regression] AArch64: Trigger internal error at
-O1/O2/O3 during RTL pass: dwarf2
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121859
Bug ID: 121859
Summary: ICE: in set_diagnostic_buffer, at buffering.cc:49
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121544
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5ee35b12de830a4688e79ed7ab464f281a220d3d
commit r16-3670-g5ee35b12de830a4688e79ed7ab464f281a220d3d
Author: Eric Botcazou
Date: M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121858
--- Comment #3 from 康桓瑋 ---
(In reply to 康桓瑋 from comment #2)
> I know it's kind of weird that rvalue reference_wrappers is not supported
> in this case, i.e. std::function_ref fr(std::nontype<&S::f>,
> std::ref(s)) is ill-formed. But that's w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121858
--- Comment #2 from 康桓瑋 ---
I know it's kind of weird that rvalue reference_wrappers is not supported in
this case, i.e. std::function_ref fr(std::nontype<&S::f>, std::ref(s))
is ill-formed. But that's what the current standard says.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121858
--- Comment #1 from 康桓瑋 ---
(In reply to 康桓瑋 from comment #0)
> This constructor invokes the member pointer on a pointer to object _Up when
> _Fn is a member pointer.
>
> However, _Up can be a std::reference_wrapper because std::invoke supports
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121858
Bug ID: 121858
Summary: function_ref(nontype_t<__fn>, _Up&& __ref) did not
consider that _Up is a reference_wrapper
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102262
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||barry.revzin at gmail dot com
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121532
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7640cc5ef80afae9b65afcca96e1eb2b9e513c21
commit r16-3669-g7640cc5ef80afae9b65afcca96e1eb2b9e513c21
Author: Eric Botcazou
Date: M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121532
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121852
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||40209
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121831
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Untested fix for the ICE:
--- gcc/expr.cc.jj 2025-08-05 12:57:06.719031397 +0200
+++ gcc/expr.cc 2025-09-08 18:53:23.453223679 +0200
@@ -6533,6 +6533,31 @@ string_cst_read_str (void *data, void *,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121852
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
I suspect another REG_UNUSED issue ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121852
--- Comment #4 from Mikael Pettersson ---
With -O2 -fno-gcse -ftree-slp-vectorize it started at r11-6188-g0b76990a9d75d9:
0b76990a9d75d97b84014e37519086b81824c307 is the first new commit
commit 0b76990a9d75d97b84014e37519086b81824c307
Author: R
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121821
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-source|needs-reduction
Ever confirmed|1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121652
--- Comment #20 from Vineet Gupta ---
(In reply to Aurelien Jarno from comment #18)
> Created attachment 62345 [details]
> Patch / Proof of concept
>
> In case we want to keep the condition unchanged, here is a patch to
> correctly handle the s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004
Bug 55004 depends on bug 121855, which changed state.
Bug 121855 Summary: Diagnostic for not-a-constant-expression has no information
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121855
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121855
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121857
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121652
--- Comment #19 from Vineet Gupta ---
(In reply to Aurelien Jarno from comment #18)
> >
> > However looks like there's a different problem lurking under the hood so let
> > me run it by this group who care about these subtleties.
> >
> > Consi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120800
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121853
--- Comment #2 from Arne Juul ---
emitting a "call __extendbfsf2" is bad no matter how efficient it's
implemented.
Looking at the gcc sources it's clear to me that the problem is in gcc/expr.cc
where the following code:
if (to_mode =
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121852
--- Comment #3 from Mikael Pettersson ---
Plain -O3 works, but with -O2 -fno-gcse -ftree-slp-vectorize 11.5.0 reproduces
the wrong-code while 10.5.0 does not.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121852
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpelinux at gmail dot com
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121802
--- Comment #4 from Kishan Parmar ---
Change, fixes other failures as well.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121857
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||internal-improvement,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121721
Gaius Mulley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121857
Bug ID: 121857
Summary: pair-fusion should replace the core ldp/stp peepholes
on aarch64
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121856
--- Comment #2 from Gaius Mulley ---
Created attachment 62348
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=62348&action=edit
Proposed fix and proposed new implementation of widesets
The new wideset implementation uses an ARRAY OF BYTE (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121856
Gaius Mulley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-09-08
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121563
--- Comment #16 from Christopher Bazley ---
(In reply to Harald van Dijk from comment #15)
> (In reply to Christopher Bazley from comment #14)
> > (In reply to Harald van Dijk from comment #12)
> > > (In reply to Christopher Bazley from comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121856
Bug ID: 121856
Summary: Set declaration takes a long time to compile
Product: gcc
Version: 16.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: mod
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121855
Bug ID: 121855
Summary: Diagnostic for not-a-constant-expression has no
information
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121855
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121836
--- Comment #4 from Benjamin Schulz ---
I want to add that i am not using any of the typical things which might cause
an optimizer to remove some boundary or something and then enter an endless
loop. instead, all the loops here go at maximum fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121510
Robin Dapp changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121510
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-15 branch has been updated by Robin Dapp :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1c824f038848870219105a5fa16c48a2e0746643
commit r15-10297-g1c824f038848870219105a5fa16c48a2e0746643
Author: Robin Dapp
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121844
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||16.0
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121563
--- Comment #17 from Christopher Bazley ---
(In reply to Harald van Dijk from comment #15)
> The problem isn't the semantics; it's the syntax. For example, I think it
> would be better if 'extern' were not implicit on function declarations
> wit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107997
--- Comment #19 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:00cd34b1046076a3272f8e8e85c97dc8f4d2ea44
commit r16-3666-g00cd34b1046076a3272f8e8e85c97dc8f4d2ea44
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121844
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:00cd34b1046076a3272f8e8e85c97dc8f4d2ea44
commit r16-3666-g00cd34b1046076a3272f8e8e85c97dc8f4d2ea44
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121821
--- Comment #3 from Richard Earnshaw ---
Created attachment 62347
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=62347&action=edit
compressed pre-processed source
Confirmed.
Another possibility is that it's something to do with the switc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121848
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|fortran |testsuite
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121848
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |16.0
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121795
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121830
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f7426ba6c0d4f779ff0f2f84e8beeadc88ebe47c
commit r16-3663-gf7426ba6c0d4f779ff0f2f84e8beeadc88ebe47c
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121844
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Hmm, it isn't enough to re-order IV creation - we are refering to IP_NORMAL pos
during use rewriting as well:
#1 0x02013101 in stmt_after_ip_normal_pos (loop=0x76e4a200,
stmt=)
at /space/r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121830
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121829
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a632becefad29206a980cc080eee74ed808f9cd3
commit r16-3662-ga632becefad29206a980cc080eee74ed808f9cd3
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121844
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
B
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121854
Bug ID: 121854
Summary: ICE when calling static member function inside lambda
with explicit object parameter
Product: gcc
Version: 15.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114892
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-09-08
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114892
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Alex Coplan :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4f91825436c7377565a08a2f8cc4d22f8cc16317
commit r16-3661-g4f91825436c7377565a08a2f8cc4d22f8cc16317
Author: Alex Coplan
Date: Fri S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121830
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Thanks for the interesting testcases. Here we have a double AND reduction
which involves another nested cycle operand.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=121831
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Note, I think the decision to punt should be based on the number of non-zero
elements or bytes. Even with gigabytes long CONSTRUCTOR if it contains say
just 64 bytes of non-zeros it will be beneficial to e
1 - 100 of 120 matches
Mail list logo
