https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95983
--- Comment #2 from ensadc at mailnesia dot com ---
See also LWG 3408 (https://wg21.link/lwg3408), which also suggests that the
`iterator_traits>` specialization is problematic.
I think the standard could remove this specialization (and define
s: zlib
gcc version 11.0.0 20200726 (experimental) (GCC)
Interestingly, this case only occurred in the 20200726 trunk version, it does
not crash on 20200725.
Thanks,
Haoxin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96320
--- Comment #9 from Damian Rouson ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #3)
>
> Do you mean this is F2008 extension?
Usually I think of "extension" as describing something non-standard. This is a
standard feature. I meant simply
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96327
--- Comment #4 from Paul McKenney ---
Bug 3506 has since been fixed, at least for the example shown in this bug
report, as you can see if you look at the godbolt, which shows that both
compilers generate a single addl instruction, which is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96327
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96321
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Assignee|unassigned at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3506
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paulmckrcu at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96327
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |target
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96327
--- Comment #1 from Paul McKenney ---
This manifests on GCC trunk (see the godbolt.org URL), but was first noted in
gcc version 7.5.0. This is specific to x86, but might apply to any other
architecture that provides increment-memory
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96326
--- Comment #2 from Pascal Terjan ---
No:
$ gcc -O3 -Wall -fno-strict-aliasing t.c; ./a.out
24
However -fno-tree-loop-vectorize fixes it:
$ gcc -O3 -Wall -fno-tree-loop-vectorize t.c; ./a.out
68
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96327
Bug ID: 96327
Summary: Inefficient increment through pointer to volatile on
x86
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96326
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |middle-end
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96326
Bug ID: 96326
Summary: Incorrect loop optimization at -O3
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95820
--- Comment #9 from Marek Polacek ---
We usually don't backport fixed for ices-on-invalid but I could be convinced in
this case.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96320
--- Comment #8 from Steve Kargl ---
On Sun, Jul 26, 2020 at 09:35:56PM +, jvdelisle at charter dot net wrote:
>
> I my too simple terms, when you define the interface and then use
> module procedure in the contains, all of the declarations
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96320
--- Comment #7 from Damian Rouson ---
For context, I nearly always put the procedure definition in a submodule. In
this case, I'm attempting to use a tool that needs to parse the code and the
tool doesn't support submodules so I moved the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96325
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-07-27
Ever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96322
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96320
jvdelisle at charter dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at charter dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90112
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=96325
--- Comment #4 from Kirill Chilikin ---
Thus, this error (or, more exactly, absence of error) does not depend on the
presence of a type-bound procedure with the same name for another derived type.
The bug description should probably be modified.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96325
--- Comment #3 from Kirill Chilikin ---
I tested the reduced test case. It also compiles successfully with version
10.2.0, while it should not. With 8.3.0, an error is reported:
$ /usr/bin/gfortran -c -o test.o test2.f90
test2.f90:14:9:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96325
--- Comment #2 from Kirill Chilikin ---
Yes, there is no type-bound procedure really, and, yes, there is a bug in the
code (intentionally: it was called for the wrong variable, which is removed for
the test case). The module M2 indeed does not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96325
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96325
Bug ID: 96325
Summary: Invalid call of a type-bound procedure is accepted
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96324
Bug ID: 96324
Summary: two semantic errors in polymorphic allocator for
Ranges because it is attributed by constexpr.
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96320
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96317
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96315
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I guess the best solution will be to disallow VL structure in OpenMP constructs
(well, privatization and mapping thereof), it is so rare extension that it is
IMHO not worth the trouble. Will have to check
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96315
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|internal compiler error |ICE with variable size
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96320
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95820
Sergei Trofimovich changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96323
--- Comment #1 from Arseny Solokha ---
(In reply to Arseny Solokha from comment #0)
> | ^% gcc-11.0.0 -c rozdnj5v.c -wrapper valgrind,-q
> rozdnj5v.c:1:24: error: invalid new-line in raw string delimiter
<…>
Oh, an excessive
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96323
Bug ID: 96323
Summary: [11 Regression] ICE in lex_raw_string, at
libcpp/lex.c:1764
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79504
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57255
Bug 57255 depends on bug 79504, which changed state.
Bug 79504 Summary: Overload resolution in trailing-return-type ignores
reference qualifier and leads to recursive template instantiation.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79504
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79504
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:798ff1c3e10c6926263f17704137e8c1a0d39be0
commit r11-2330-g798ff1c3e10c6926263f17704137e8c1a0d39be0
Author: Patrick Palka
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96320
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Fortran 2008 added module subroutine interface bodies specifically to allow
> interface bodies in the same scope a the corresponding procedure definitions.
> In order to avoid duplication, the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96320
--- Comment #2 from Damian Rouson ---
Hi Dominique,
> What do you want to do with your test?
I don't understand the question. The submitted code is designed to be a minimal
demonstration of the problem so I don't want to do anything with it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96320
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-07-26
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94327
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70611
--- Comment #7 from Mark Wielaard ---
(In reply to Mark Wielaard from comment #6)
> Sorry, commented on the wrong bug, the above was meant for bug #93865
Groan, I seem very confused today. That comment was fine. It was me who got
confused
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70611
--- Comment #6 from Mark Wielaard ---
(In reply to Mark Wielaard from comment #5)
> This is also one of the issues that prevent elfutils to build with LTO.
> The workaround is to compile with -Wno-error=stack-usage= added to CFLAGS:
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93865
--- Comment #2 from Mark Wielaard ---
This also impacts rpm (find-debuginfo.sh) when it tries to extract the source
files from binaries compiled with LTO enabled:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/1207
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96322
Bug ID: 96322
Summary: 22_locale/numpunct/members/char/3.cc is outdated:
expects grouping=0, actual=3
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96206
--- Comment #2 from Enrico Zini ---
Unfortunately I do not have access to gcc 8.4.0.
I also found a workaround for the ICE that allowed me to unblock the next step
of an immense yak shaving quest to compile Qt5:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95585
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Mark Eggleston
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5aa8760e31909d278f28d7d4bb1479d7607228c6
commit r9-8767-g5aa8760e31909d278f28d7d4bb1479d7607228c6
Author: Mark Eggleston
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95585
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Mark Eggleston
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7dcd5b38fa91326e120a7ebb6f521330d83ff757
commit r10-8534-g7dcd5b38fa91326e120a7ebb6f521330d83ff757
Author: Mark Eggleston
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96319
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94978
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |tkoenig at gcc dot
gnu.org
50 matches
Mail list logo
