https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94082
--- Comment #6 from Deniz Bahadir ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #5)
>
> It definitely doesn't mean __builtin_memcpy has to be used. It means "we
> don't want to change std::memcpy, implementations must use some other method
> to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94082
--- Comment #4 from Deniz Bahadir ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #3)
> (In reply to Deniz Bahadir from comment #1)
> > Reading P0202 (wg21.link/p0202) (which made it into C++20) it sounds as if
> > `__builtin_memcpy` should be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94082
--- Comment #2 from Deniz Bahadir ---
Here is a link to Stack Overflow where I originally asked a question about this
behavior: https://stackoverflow.com/q/60572199/3115457
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94082
--- Comment #1 from Deniz Bahadir ---
Not: As due to the sourceware/gcc move it seems my original bug-report comment
got lost, I am here re-posting it.
Reading P0202 (wg21.link/p0202) (which made it into C++20) it sounds as if
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: D.Bahadir at GMX dot de
Target Milestone: ---
Compilation fails with the following code:
```
#include
#include
#include
constexpr std::uint32_t extract(const std::uint8_t* data) noexcept
{
std::uint32_t num
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80171
--- Comment #6 from Deniz Bahadir ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
>
> Simple fix (further reduced testcase appreciated)
CReduce originally created a radically reduced test-case which however was no
valid C++ anymore. (My check
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80171
--- Comment #4 from Deniz Bahadir ---
Created attachment 41043
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41043=edit
Non-reduced test-case which fails with -O2 and -O3.
This was the original test-case which did not fail with "-O1" but
++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: D.Bahadir at GMX dot de
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 41041
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41041=edit
Testcase that yields segmentation fault when optimizing.
Compiling the attached (and redu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62258
--- Comment #17 from Deniz Bahadir D.Bahadir at GMX dot de ---
Did this fix make it into the latest GCC 5.2.0 release?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62258
Deniz Bahadir D.Bahadir at GMX dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||D.Bahadir at GMX
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61489
--- Comment #3 from Deniz Bahadir D.Bahadir at GMX dot de ---
Thanks for the comment.
So, at least we aggree that the cases for addr2 and addr6 should not warn (in
C++11) as it initializes all values. Possibly this holds true for addr9, too?
I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61489
--- Comment #5 from Deniz Bahadir D.Bahadir at GMX dot de ---
Thanks again.
Then I need to appologize for misunderstanding the meaning of the warning-flag.
Because of several internet-sources, like the one I cited, I always thought
: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: D.Bahadir at GMX dot de
Created attachment 32928
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32928action=edit
test-case
This bug is related to https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36750 but
addresses C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61489
--- Comment #1 from Deniz Bahadir D.Bahadir at GMX dot de ---
This does not only occur with GCC 4.9.0 but also with older ones like 4.7 and
4.8.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60999
--- Comment #1 from Deniz Bahadir D.Bahadir at GMX dot de ---
Created attachment 32706
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32706action=edit
preprocessed source generated by GCC with option '-save-temps'
15 matches
Mail list logo
