https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94255
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94590
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5d5dcc65aae1024da31e0e9cae6a8966461037e8
commit r11-176-g5d5dcc65aae1024da31e0e9cae6a8966461037e8
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Sun
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94590
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94983
--- Comment #2 from Andrey Vihrov ---
Thanks for the helpful link.
To clarify, list initialization in a new-expression context behaves differently
from other cases such as "S{};" and "S s{};" (be their behavior correct or
incorrect).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94988
Bug ID: 94988
Summary: [11 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr64110.c
scan-assembler vmovd[\\t ]
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94938
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Marek Polacek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e5613c55c2900cd23c9e78592f10258e19c74ab3
commit r10-8120-ge5613c55c2900cd23c9e78592f10258e19c74ab3
Author: Marek Polacek
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94938
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94857
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94765
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94985
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |msebor at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94985
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88937
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94984
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|nathan at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot
gnu.org
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94987
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94817
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c7100843831147a034fe37d231c54ac53ceace45
commit r11-178-gc7100843831147a034fe37d231c54ac53ceace45
Author: Iain Sandoe
Date: Thu M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92894
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6fedf28c7921f125be75a9f688a7b845a1b5663b
commit r10-8121-g6fedf28c7921f125be75a9f688a7b845a1b5663b
Author: Jonathan Wake
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94829
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c7100843831147a034fe37d231c54ac53ceace45
commit r11-178-gc7100843831147a034fe37d231c54ac53ceace45
Author: Iain Sandoe
Date: Thu M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67491
Bug 67491 depends on bug 92894, which changed state.
Bug 92894 Summary: "declared using local type 'test01()::X', is used but never
defined" during concept satisfaction
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92894
What|Remov
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92894
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94943
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94971
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Parallel mode is basically broken for any new C++ standard.
All the tests for C++20 constexpr algorithms fail, because the std::__parallel
versions are not constexpr:
FAIL: 25_algorithms/replace_if/conste
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94989
Bug ID: 94989
Summary: missing -Wclass-memaccess on calls to functions with
attribute access
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94985
--- Comment #2 from Joey Liu ---
Just fyi, the patch attached in this ticket is slightly different than the
patch in the mailing list (I limit it to flexible array only). It can handle
the existing test cases (no regressions). However I do think
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94971
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9c24e97a97aaad4ad0500170cbae4f387d82ddd6
commit r11-180-g9c24e97a97aaad4ad0500170cbae4f387d82ddd6
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92472
--- Comment #13 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4cbc9d8b346b932f34828a51e8822881413951b7
commit r11-179-g4cbc9d8b346b932f34828a51e8822881413951b7
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94143
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83118
Vladimir Fuka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vladimir.fuka at gmail dot com
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84257
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91520
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94990
Bug ID: 94990
Summary: NFC / NFD in identifiers
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84402
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84889
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94990
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
Note that ISO C references ISO 10646, not Unicode, so normalization forms
are not part of the C notion of identifier characters and differently
normalized forms are different identifiers as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91520
--- Comment #5 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #4)
> (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #1)
> >
> > I plan on publishing an update to my alternate assembler/linker pair that
> > incorporates the changes from LLVM-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94590
--- Comment #8 from Giuseppe D'Angelo ---
Thank you!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92104
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90915
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94991
Bug ID: 94991
Summary: ICE: Segmentation fault with option
-mgeneral-regs-only
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94991
--- Comment #1 from Fei Yang ---
For the given testcase, we are doing FAIL for scalar floating move expand
pattern since TARGET_FLOAT is false with option -mgeneral-regs-only. But move
expand pattern cannot fail. It would be better to to replace
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94780
Paul Hua changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paul.hua.gm at gmail dot com
--- Comment #8 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94842
Paul Hua changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paul.hua.gm at gmail dot com
--- Comment #10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87335
Trupti Pardeshi changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trupti_pardeshi@persistent.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94992
Bug ID: 94992
Summary: gcc thinks a member variable is uninitialised
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: mi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94992
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Comment on attachment 48477
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48477
testcase
>my_future f2;
>new (&f2) my_future(std::move(f2));
This is going to be problematic as f2 is being cre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94992
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87335
--- Comment #15 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Trupti Pardeshi from comment #14)
> Could you please help to know which version of gcc has this fix?
GCC 9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87335
--- Comment #16 from Trupti Pardeshi
---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #15)
> (In reply to Trupti Pardeshi from comment #14)
> > Could you please help to know which version of gcc has this fix?
>
> GCC 9
Thank you Andrew for the repl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94993
Bug ID: 94993
Summary: aarch64 incompatible with
-mgeneral-regs-only
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94988
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Last reconfirmed|
201 - 249 of 249 matches
Mail list logo
