[Bug target/109903] Register misallocation in hand-crafted asm insn, no diagnostics produced

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109903 --- Comment #6 from Dimitri Gorokhovik --- Thank you Andrew, I indeed see now the early-clobber effect of this code. It isn't that we don't read documentation (we do time to time), rather our real asm statement has more output ops and more

[Bug target/109903] Register misallocation in hand-crafted asm insn, no diagnostics produced

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109903 --- Comment #4 from Dimitri Gorokhovik --- Hi Andrew, I'd agree more with "WONTFIX" here ;-) We are not looking for solution. We want to spare the same hassle to others. This asm doesn't write to memory, it doesn't even read any -- 'a' is

[Bug target/109903] New: Register misallocation in hand-crafted asm insn, no diagnostics produced

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109903 Bug ID: 109903 Summary: Register misallocation in hand-crafted asm insn, no diagnostics produced Product: gcc Version: 14.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug c/103579] New: [gcc-10.3.1, gcc-12.0.0] -fno-builtin-memset and -fno-builtin have different effect on optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103579 Bug ID: 103579 Summary: [gcc-10.3.1, gcc-12.0.0] -fno-builtin-memset and -fno-builtin have different effect on optimization Product: gcc Version: og10 (devel/omp/gcc-10)

[Bug c++/98824] [C++-20] function template non-type-class-arg deduction fails with a reason that looks bogus

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98824 --- Comment #1 from Dimitri Gorokhovik --- It doesn't seem to contradict N4868 :-( Modifying the code slightly (adding refs, splitting deduction across two fn templates) didn't show any other differences from clang: all other modification

[Bug c++/98824] New: [C++-20] function template non-type-class-arg deduction fails with a reason that looks bogus

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98824 Bug ID: 98824 Summary: [C++-20] function template non-type-class-arg deduction fails with a reason that looks bogus Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/98810] New: [C++20] ICE in tsubst_copy, at cp/pt.c:16771

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98810 Bug ID: 98810 Summary: [C++20] ICE in tsubst_copy, at cp/pt.c:16771 Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug c++/98803] New: [C++20] ICE on invalid code with checked build [in synthesize_implicit_template_parm, at cp/parser.c:45335]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98803 Bug ID: 98803 Summary: [C++20] ICE on invalid code with checked build [in synthesize_implicit_template_parm, at cp/parser.c:45335] Product: gcc Version: 11.0

[Bug c++/98164] New: [C++20] The type displayed in compiler output cannot be reused as displayed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98164 Bug ID: 98164 Summary: [C++20] The type displayed in compiler output cannot be reused as displayed Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug c++/97639] New: [c++20,-fconcepts-ts] ICE: gcc_assert in tsubst, cp/pt.c:15464

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97639 Bug ID: 97639 Summary: [c++20,-fconcepts-ts] ICE: gcc_assert in tsubst, cp/pt.c:15464 Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/97572] [c++ 20] Constraining is broken

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97572 --- Comment #4 from Dimitri Gorokhovik --- I probably cannot objectively tell anymore which one is better, since I just read the specification. However, subjectively, Clang's diagnostics: a) seems to have phrasing much closer to the spec, and

[Bug c++/97572] [c++ 20] Constraining is broken

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97572 --- Comment #2 from Dimitri Gorokhovik --- Fair enough, passing a boolean by value into 'any()' is evaluation of local parameter 't', and that is prohibited (7.5.7.4/2). Doesn't this merit a better diagnostics though? A slightly modified

[Bug c++/97572] New: [c++ 20] Constraining is broken

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97572 Bug ID: 97572 Summary: [c++ 20] Constraining is broken Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug c++/97253] New: [c++20] last character not shown when printing out std::array via -Wunused-local-typedefs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97253 Bug ID: 97253 Summary: [c++20] last character not shown when printing out std::array via -Wunused-local-typedefs Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/94485] Inter-dependency between { tree-sra, ABI, inlining, loop-unrolling } leads to mis-optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94485 --- Comment #8 from Dimitri Gorokhovik --- I was able to reduce same code (see the attached file bug-6.cpp). -- when compiled correctly, running it produces the following (expected) output: cube: ({ 0, 0, 0 }, { 1, 1, 1 }) cube: ({ 0, 0, 1 },

[Bug c++/97059] C++20: compound requirement uses inconsistent return type (adds ref)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97059 --- Comment #2 from Dimitri Gorokhovik --- (In reply to Dimitri Gorokhovik from comment #1) > I was able to reduce same code (attached file bug-6.cpp). Please disregard the comment #1 -- posted to wrong bug.

[Bug c++/97059] C++20: compound requirement uses inconsistent return type (adds ref)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97059 --- Comment #1 from Dimitri Gorokhovik --- I was able to reduce same code (attached file bug-6.cpp). -- when compiled correctly, running it produces the following (expected) output: cube: ({ 0, 0, 0 }, { 1, 1, 1 }) cube: ({ 0, 0, 1 }, { 1, 1,

[Bug c++/94485] [10.0.1, c++2a] g++ optimizes away necessary code, accepts arbitrary inline asm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94485 Dimitri Gorokhovik changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #48194|0 |1 is obsolete|