https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93630
--- Comment #4 from Rodrigo Rivas ---
Reproduced with 9.1 and 9.2 here:
https://godbolt.org/z/ZeEsuc
Trunk seems immune, though. Maybe it is already fixed there?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93630
--- Comment #3 from Rodrigo Rivas ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> Can't reproduce, neither with 9.x, nor trunk, nor various revisions in
> between, different optimization levels etc. I get '' in all places where it
> should
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rodrigorivascosta at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Hello!
Consider the following C++ code:
```
#include
struct Data
{
const char *text;
};
const struct Data group
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46376
Summary: LTO, MinGW and virtual base classes don't work
together
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46376
--- Comment #1 from Rodrigo Rivas rodrigorivascosta at gmail dot com
2010-11-08 17:07:11 UTC ---
Sorry for the previous empty body... my dog ate my keyboard ;-)
Anyway, the following code fails when compiled with MinGW:
$ i686-mingw32msvc-g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46056
--- Comment #6 from Rodrigo Rivas rodrigorivascosta at gmail dot com
2010-10-20 08:56:30 UTC ---
Ok, thank you for the report...
It looks like the range-for temporary completely ignore destructors.
Also, if the range is a temporary it gets
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46056
--- Comment #7 from Rodrigo Rivas rodrigorivascosta at gmail dot com
2010-10-20 10:06:39 UTC ---
I've just sent a patch to gcc-patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-10/msg01699.html
In the testcase I added a lot of other destructor
--- Comment #5 from rodrigorivascosta at gmail dot com 2010-07-26 09:59
---
Created an attachment (id=21313)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21313action=view)
Patch to add pedantic warning to inline namespaces in C++98
I think that this tiny patch should do
reference with L-value
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: rodrigorivascosta at gmail dot com
GCC build triplet
--- Comment #3 from rodrigorivascosta at gmail dot com 2009-12-16 17:05
---
If the lambda line is changed from:
[] { return 0; };
into any of the following:
[=] { return 0; };
[] { return 0; };
int foo = 0;
[foo] { return 0; };
The warnings disappear
ReportedBy: rodrigorivascosta at gmail dot com
GCC build triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42370
--- Comment #1 from rodrigorivascosta at gmail dot com 2009-12-14 20:19
---
Created an attachment (id=19294)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19294action=view)
Simplest test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42370
--- Comment #2 from rodrigorivascosta at gmail dot com 2009-12-14 20:21
---
Created an attachment (id=19295)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19295action=view)
Simplest test case
Sorry, wrong MIME in the atch 19294
--
rodrigorivascosta at gmail dot com changed
13 matches
Mail list logo
