[Bug target/93808] [9 Regression] [SH] Ruby crashes with 'Illegal Instruction' when compiled with gcc-9

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93808 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Known to work|

[Bug tree-optimization/93820] [9/10 Regression] wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93820 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug target/93819] PPC64 builtin vec_rlnm() argument order is wrong.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93819 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/93814] [9/10 Regression] ICE in build_entry_thunks, at fortran/trans-decl.c:2898

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93814 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug fortran/93814] [9/10 Regression] ICE in build_entry_thunks, at fortran/trans-decl.c:2898

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93814 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Target Milestone|---

[Bug gcov-profile/93726] [GCOV] unexecuted functions lead to incorrect code coverage when it calls a function with a variable argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93726 --- Comment #2 from Yibiao Yang --- (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1) > How is that different from PR93725? Of this one, it wrongly marked a (executed) statement as not executed. For Bug PR93725, the frequencies is incorrect: A

[Bug tree-optimization/93820] [9/10 Regression] wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93820 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW CC|

[Bug fortran/93814] [9/10 Regression] ICE in build_entry_thunks, at fortran/trans-decl.c:2898

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93814 markeggleston at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last

[Bug fortran/93813] [8/9/10 Regression] ICE in gfc_trans_select_type_cases, at fortran/trans-stmt.c:2874

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93813 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Target Milestone|---

[Bug c/93812] [9/10 Regression] ICE in get_constant, at c-family/c-format.c:325

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93812 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 Target Milestone|---

[Bug libstdc++/92546] [10 Regression] Large increase in preprocessed file sizes in C++2a mode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92546 --- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely --- Another way to reduce things would be to move tuple_size and tuple_element from to a new header, so that e.g. doesn't need the whole of .

[Bug lto/91724] [8 Regression] profiled lto bootstrap fails on arm-linux-gnueabihf

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91724 Matthias Klose changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/93824] New: -Wredundant-tags false positives

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93824 Bug ID: 93824 Summary: -Wredundant-tags false positives Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: diagnostic Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug middle-end/93806] Wrong optimization: instability of floating-point results with -funsafe-math-optimizations leads to nonsense

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93806 --- Comment #6 from Alexander Cherepanov --- I agree that every separate optimization here is quite natural. At the same time, the end result is quite unnatural. The following is a look at the situation from an outsider POV.

[Bug ipa/93823] [10 Regression] ICE: in find_more_scalar_values_for_callers_subset, at ipa-cp.c:4709 due to -fipa-cp

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93823 --- Comment #2 from fxue at gcc dot gnu.org --- Duplicate of pr93707

[Bug target/93808] [9 Regression] [SH] Ruby crashes with 'Illegal Instruction' when compiled with gcc-9

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93808 --- Comment #10 from Oleg Endo --- I've just tried to compile the preprocessed string.i with the current gcc 9 branch sh-elf cross compiler with the following options: sh-elf-gcc -c -mieee -g -O2 -fstack-protector-strong -Wformat

[Bug fortran/93552] [8/9/10 Regression][OpenACC] ICE in gfc_trans_exit, at fortran/trans-stmt.c:6110 since r7-6598-g02889d23ee3b0285

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93552 --- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus --- (In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #2) > As PR 93825 shows, Wrong PR – it is related, but the one relevant for this discussion is PR 93826.

[Bug fortran/93827] New: fails to initialize logical variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93827 Bug ID: 93827 Summary: fails to initialize logical variable Product: gcc Version: 4.8.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran

[Bug tree-optimization/93767] [8/9/10 Regression] wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu since r8-6064

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93767 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f91aa3e6cb808f8dfc6b45fa135f7583a7549161 commit r10-6732-gf91aa3e6cb808f8dfc6b45fa135f7583a7549161 Author: Richard Sandiford

[Bug middle-end/93806] Wrong optimization: instability of floating-point results with -funsafe-math-optimizations leads to nonsense

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93806 --- Comment #7 from Vincent Lefèvre --- (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #5) > From below I implicitely assume you say that "1. + x != 1." -> "x != 0." > isn't "rearranging at the source level". No, it depends on how you do that. If

[Bug fortran/93554] [8/9/10 Regression] ICE in expand_oacc_for, at omp-expand.c:6035 since r6-4364-ge4834818d22f5c66

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93554 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug ipa/93823] [10 Regression] ICE: in find_more_scalar_values_for_callers_subset, at ipa-cp.c:4709 due to -fipa-cp

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93823 --- Comment #3 from Zdenek Sojka --- (In reply to fxue from comment #2) > Duplicate of pr93707 Sorry about the dup, I searched for "find_more_scalar_values_for_callers_subset" in Summary only; search in Comment used to be slow (but it looks

[Bug fortran/93826] New: [OpenMP][OpenACC] Collapsed loop – code silently ignored

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93826 Bug ID: 93826 Summary: [OpenMP][OpenACC] Collapsed loop – code silently ignored Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: openacc, openmp

[Bug lto/91724] [8 Regression] profiled lto bootstrap fails on arm-linux-gnueabihf

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91724 --- Comment #8 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #7) > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3) > > I'm checking head with our GCC 8 build on armv7 which we build with > > --with-arch=armv7-a

[Bug lto/91724] [8 Regression] profiled lto bootstrap fails on arm-linux-gnueabihf

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91724 --- Comment #9 from Matthias Klose --- that works again with the gcc-8 branch from 20200218. LTO link times however are about three hours.

[Bug fortran/93554] [8/9/10 Regression] ICE in expand_oacc_for, at omp-expand.c:6035 since r6-4364-ge4834818d22f5c66

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93554 --- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus --- Draft patch, lightly tested: --- a/gcc/omp-expand.c +++ b/gcc/omp-expand.c @@ -6029,10 +6029,7 @@ expand_oacc_for (struct omp_region *region, struct omp_for_data *fd) basic_block cont_bb = region->cont;

[Bug ipa/93823] [10 Regression] ICE: in find_more_scalar_values_for_callers_subset, at ipa-cp.c:4709 due to -fipa-cp

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93823 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug rtl-optimization/93730] [8/9/10 Regression] ICE in make_decl_rtl, at varasm.c:1375

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93730 --- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor --- I think VLA initialization should be rejected in C++ just as it is in C. The mangling wasn't specified the last time I checked so unless there has been some informal consensus on how to do it changing it for

[Bug fortran/93825] New: [OpenACC] Implicit typing not honored – bogus type errors

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93825 Bug ID: 93825 Summary: [OpenACC] Implicit typing not honored – bogus type errors Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: openacc,

[Bug fortran/93552] [8/9/10 Regression][OpenACC] ICE in gfc_trans_exit, at fortran/trans-stmt.c:6110 since r7-6598-g02889d23ee3b0285

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93552 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||openacc CC|

[Bug fortran/93825] [OpenACC] Implicit typing not honored – bogus type errors

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93825 --- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus --- Created attachment 47877 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47877=edit Draft patch The attached patch fixes the issue for "tile". (By doing what is done in gfc_resolve_code for EXEC_DO.)

[Bug lto/91724] [8 Regression] profiled lto bootstrap fails on arm-linux-gnueabihf

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91724 --- Comment #7 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3) > I'm checking head with our GCC 8 build on armv7 which we build with > --with-arch=armv7-a --with-tune=cortex-a15 --with-float=hard > notably w/o

[Bug libgomp/93591] Bad number of threads and place management on Power-9 (with OpenBLAS)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93591 --- Comment #1 from Jérôme Richard --- It is worth noting that if OMP_DISPLAY_AFFINITY is set to TRUE, the runtime do not print the affinity when the issue occur (and vice-versa: the value is printed when no problem happend). A deeper analysis

[Bug middle-end/93644] [10 Regression] spurious -Wreturn-local-addr with PHI of PHI

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93644 --- Comment #7 from Jeffrey A. Law --- So optimizing things in remove_range_assertions works for the reduced testcase, but not for the original testcase. There's a couple of deeper issues that have to be figured out for the original testcase.

[Bug c++/93761] ICE when compiling a standard header as a header unit

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93761 --- Comment #4 from Nathan Sidwell --- fwiw the stack traceback doesn't look like it's concept related, probably some other bug ...

[Bug fortran/93839] New: diagnostic starts with lowercase letter

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93839 Bug ID: 93839 Summary: diagnostic starts with lowercase letter Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran

[Bug translation/93836] New: teach xgettext what HOST_WIDE_INT_PRINT means

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93836 Bug ID: 93836 Summary: teach xgettext what HOST_WIDE_INT_PRINT means Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug c/93837] New: overly complicated code in c_finish_omp_declare_variant

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93837 Bug ID: 93837 Summary: overly complicated code in c_finish_omp_declare_variant Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/93790] Cannot initialize reference from std::reference_wrapper using direct- or list-initialization syntax in GCC 10 c++2a mode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93790 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug fortran/93835] [9/10 Regression] ICE in simplify_findloc_nodim, at fortran/simplify.c:5513

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93835 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4

[Bug translation/93838] New: space at the end of a diagnostic in cp/parser.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93838 Bug ID: 93838 Summary: space at the end of a diagnostic in cp/parser.c Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug middle-end/93644] [10 Regression] spurious -Wreturn-local-addr with PHI of PHI

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93644 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2 Target Milestone|10.0

[Bug other/93168] Error messages are full of control code garbage

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93168 --- Comment #7 from Segher Boessenkool --- (In reply to David Malcolm from comment #6) > Segher: did the above patch fix it for your terminal? I haven't found time to test it on all those systems yet, no.

[Bug c++/93676] [8/9/10 Regression] crash in build_value_init

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93676 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch --- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek

[Bug middle-end/89337] Bogus "exceeds maximum object size" on unreachable code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89337 --- Comment #15 from Rafael Avila de Espindola --- In gcc 9 it is pretty easy to avoid this warning by adding an assert or builtin_unreachable and we have done that in seastar. Unfortunately the warning still shows up with gcc 8. Is there a

[Bug middle-end/93829] [10 Regression] bogus -Wstringop-overflow on memcpy of a struct with a pointer member from another with a long string

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93829 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Known to work|

[Bug fortran/93835] [9/10 Regression] ICE in simplify_findloc_nodim, at fortran/simplify.c:5513

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93835 G. Steinmetz changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code --- Comment #1 from G.

[Bug tree-optimization/63989] tree-ssa-strlen.c doesn't handle constant pointer plus and array refs if constant offset is smaller than known constant string length

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63989 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2014-11-20 00:00:00 |2020-2-19 Known to fail|

[Bug other/93168] Error messages are full of control code garbage

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93168 --- Comment #6 from David Malcolm --- Segher: did the above patch fix it for your terminal?

[Bug middle-end/93829] New: [10 Regression] bogus -Wstringop-overflow on memcpy of a struct with a pointer member from another with a long string

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93829 Bug ID: 93829 Summary: [10 Regression] bogus -Wstringop-overflow on memcpy of a struct with a pointer member from another with a long string Product: gcc

[Bug fortran/93835] New: [9/10 Regression] ICE in simplify_findloc_nodim, at fortran/simplify.c:5513

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93835 Bug ID: 93835 Summary: [9/10 Regression] ICE in simplify_findloc_nodim, at fortran/simplify.c:5513 Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug target/93828] New: [10 Regression] incorrect shufps instruction emitted for -march=k8

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93828 Bug ID: 93828 Summary: [10 Regression] incorrect shufps instruction emitted for -march=k8 Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: wrong-code

[Bug translation/93830] New: typo in avr command line error message

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93830 Bug ID: 93830 Summary: typo in avr command line error message Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug fortran/93832] New: [8/9/10 Regression] ICE in gfc_convert_to_structure_constructor, at fortran/primary.c:3100

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93832 Bug ID: 93832 Summary: [8/9/10 Regression] ICE in gfc_convert_to_structure_constructor, at fortran/primary.c:3100 Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status:

[Bug translation/93831] New: wrong abbreviation in diagnostic for 64-bit Darwin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93831 Bug ID: 93831 Summary: wrong abbreviation in diagnostic for 64-bit Darwin Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug fortran/93834] New: [8/9/10 Regression] ICE in trans_caf_is_present, at fortran/trans-intrinsic.c:8469

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93834 Bug ID: 93834 Summary: [8/9/10 Regression] ICE in trans_caf_is_present, at fortran/trans-intrinsic.c:8469 Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug tree-optimization/77889] missing optimization on strlen(p + offset) with a bounded offset

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77889 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2016-10-07 00:00:00 |2020-2-19 Component|middle-end

[Bug target/93828] [10 Regression] incorrect shufps instruction emitted for -march=k8

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93828 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |10.0

Re: [RFC] c++/93730 create VLA constructor if explicitly initialized as zeroes

On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 7:29 AM Slava Barinov wrote: > > * cp/decl.c (reshape_init_array_1): Enforce constructor creation > for VLAs when initialized with zero value. > * testsuite/g++.dg/pr93730.C: New test > * testsuite/g++.dg/abi/mangle72.C: Change mangling to

[Bug translation/93831] wrong abbreviation in diagnostic for 64-bit Darwin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93831 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic, easyhack

[Bug translation/93840] .po files are installed to PREFIX but only looked up in /usr/lib

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93840 Roland Illig changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/92128] fold more non-constant strlen relational expressions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92128 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Martin Sebor : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ccf86d54cb02ed24bc4568bd9fffdcdbf0bf68a8 commit r10-6748-gccf86d54cb02ed24bc4568bd9fffdcdbf0bf68a8 Author: Martin Sebor Date: Wed

[Bug target/93811] __builtin___clear_cache() is a noop on powerpc (which is incorrect)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93811 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- Note ___clear_cache was originally designed for trampolines. PoewrPC64v1 ABI does not use trampolines for nested functions.

[Bug middle-end/61577] [4.9.0 Regression] can't compile on hp-ux v3 ia64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61577 --- Comment #190 from Peter Bisroev --- (In reply to dave.anglin from comment #189) > On 2020-02-16 4:21 p.m., John David Anglin wrote: > > On 2020-02-15 3:32 p.m., peter.bisroev at groundlabs dot com wrote: > >> I have not had a chance to look

[Bug fortran/93839] diagnostic starts with lowercase letter

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93839 Roland Illig changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/93839] diagnostic starts with lowercase letter

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93839 --- Comment #3 from Steve Kargl --- On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 10:41:16PM +, roland.illig at gmx dot de wrote: > > --- Comment #2 from Roland Illig --- > Ok, if it's intentionally written in lowercase I'm fine with it. In the German >

[Bug translation/93841] New: typo in or1kopt: generated using using

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93841 Bug ID: 93841 Summary: typo in or1kopt: generated using using Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug c++/93596] [10 Regression] ICE related to templates and vectors.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93596 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1

[Bug middle-end/93829] [10 Regression] bogus -Wstringop-overflow on memcpy of a struct with a pointer member from another with a long string

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93829 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch Target Milestone|---

[Bug c++/93169] [10 regression] Variable incorrectly put into readonly section.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93169 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch --- Comment #7 from Marek Polacek

[Bug translation/93836] teach xgettext what HOST_WIDE_INT_PRINT means

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93836 --- Comment #2 from Roland Illig --- Thanks for the explanation. I think it might make sense to have a static analysis tool for cases like this, to prevent this mistake from the beginning, or at least be notified quickly, before the translators

[Bug libstdc++/93770] std::tuple::operator< sometimes does needless extra work

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93770 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug translation/93840] New: .po files are installed to PREFIX but read from DATAROOTDIR

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93840 Bug ID: 93840 Summary: .po files are installed to PREFIX but read from DATAROOTDIR Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/93839] diagnostic starts with lowercase letter

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93839 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5 CC|

[Bug translation/93840] .po files are installed to PREFIX but only looked up in /usr/lib

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93840 --- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- The messages should be read from LOCALEDIR as passed to bindtextdomain. If GCC is calling bindtextdomain from libc with the correct LOCALEDIR argument, this is not a GCC bug. (If it's

[Bug tree-optimization/79621] Missed path isolation opportunity

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79621 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/93169] [10 regression] Variable incorrectly put into readonly section.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93169 --- Comment #8 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8f9dd1b0bdd935592ba151e9d843fddf6193afbc commit r10-6749-g8f9dd1b0bdd935592ba151e9d843fddf6193afbc Author: Marek Polacek Date:

[Bug c++/93169] [10 regression] Variable incorrectly put into readonly section.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93169 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/93842] New: generic lambda accesses a variable with with automatic storage duration that wasn't captured by the lambda expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93842 Bug ID: 93842 Summary: generic lambda accesses a variable with with automatic storage duration that wasn't captured by the lambda expression Product: gcc

[Bug translation/93836] teach xgettext what HOST_WIDE_INT_PRINT means

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93836 --- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- It is never valid to use HOST_WIDE_INT_PRINT macros in calls to diagnostic functions, because the HOST_WIDE_INT_PRINT macros expand to host printf formats (e.g. "I64" on MinGW host), which

[Bug libstdc++/93770] std::tuple::operator< sometimes does needless extra work

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93770 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug rtl-optimization/93658] [9/10 Regression] infinite loop building ghostscript and icu with -O3 on powerpc64le-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93658 Peter Bergner changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug c++/93431] FAIL: g++.dg/cpp2a/lambda-uneval9.C -std=c++2a (test for excess errors)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93431 --- Comment #1 from John David Anglin --- The following are unsupported: UNSUPPORTED: g++.dg/cpp2a/lambda-uneval9.C -std=c++98 UNSUPPORTED: g++.dg/cpp2a/lambda-uneval9.C -std=c++14 UNSUPPORTED: g++.dg/cpp2a/lambda-uneval9.C -std=c++17 Seems

[Bug go/93844] New: [debug] Incorrect scope for local variables

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93844 Bug ID: 93844 Summary: [debug] Incorrect scope for local variables Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: go

[Bug tree-optimization/93843] New: wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu

-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: qrzhang at gatech dot edu Target Milestone: --- A recent regression. Gcc-9 works fine. Bisection points to g:6271dd984d7f920d4fb17ad37af6a1f8e6b796dc $ gcc-trunk -v gcc version 10.0.1 20200219 (experimental) [master

[Bug fortran/93714] [8/9/10 Regression] ICE in gfc_check_same_strlen, at fortran/check.c:1253

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93714 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-8 branch has been updated by Mark Eggleston : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:db0e1e9948434352455db1e729383272d79105e8 commit r8-10037-gdb0e1e9948434352455db1e729383272d79105e8 Author: Mark Eggleston

[Bug fortran/93714] [8/9/10 Regression] ICE in gfc_check_same_strlen, at fortran/check.c:1253

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93714 markeggleston at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug c++/93821] Define __cplusplus to 202002L in C++20

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93821 --- Comment #2 from Romain Geissler --- You may have misunderstood my intentions here. I was just trying to suggest a change which I think is better for the consistency with the standard and with clang which just implemented this change. So yes

[Bug middle-end/93806] Wrong optimization: instability of floating-point results with -funsafe-math-optimizations leads to nonsense

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93806 --- Comment #4 from Vincent Lefèvre --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3) > with -funsafe-math-optimizations you get the 1 + x != 1 -> x != 0 > optimization which is unsafe because a rounding step is removed. > But you asked for that.

[Bug ipa/93823] New: [10 Regression] ICE: in find_more_scalar_values_for_callers_subset, at ipa-cp.c:4709 due to -fipa-cp

ead model: posix Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd gcc version 10.0.1 20200219 (experimental) (GCC)

[Bug c++/93821] Define __cplusplus to 202002L in C++20

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93821 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Romain Geissler from comment #2) > You may have misunderstood my intentions here. Yes, looks like I did. The way you phrased it (particularly "you need to use this assertions so that there is

[Bug middle-end/93806] Wrong optimization: instability of floating-point results with -funsafe-math-optimizations leads to nonsense

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93806 --- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Wed, 19 Feb 2020, vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93806 > > --- Comment #4 from Vincent Lefèvre --- > (In reply to Richard Biener from

[Bug ipa/93823] [10 Regression] ICE: in find_more_scalar_values_for_callers_subset, at ipa-cp.c:4709 due to -fipa-cp

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93823 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 Target Milestone|---

[Bug c++/93822] [8/9/10 Regression] ICE in make_ssa_name_fn, at tree-ssanames.c:279 since r7-536-g381cdae49785fc4b

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93822 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Component|sanitizer |c++ --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener

[Bug c++/93821] Define __cplusplus to 202002L in C++20

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93821 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- Don't we up __cplusplus only when we support all language features?

[Bug fortran/93827] fails to initialize logical variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93827 markeggleston at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug fortran/93833] New: [8/9/10 Regression] ICE in trans_array_constructor, at fortran/trans-array.c:2566

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93833 Bug ID: 93833 Summary: [8/9/10 Regression] ICE in trans_array_constructor, at fortran/trans-array.c:2566 Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug fortran/93813] [8/9/10 Regression] ICE in gfc_trans_select_type_cases, at fortran/trans-stmt.c:2874

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93813 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/93821] New: Define __cplusplus to 202002L in C++20

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93821 Bug ID: 93821 Summary: Define __cplusplus to 202002L in C++20 Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug c++/93821] Define __cplusplus to 202002L in C++20

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93821 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

  1   2   >