https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109753
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener ---
I think the issue might be that whoever is creating
__static_initialization_and_destruction_0 fails to honor the active
target pragma. Which means back to my suggestion to have multiple ones
when
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113322
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-*
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113326
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> One more thing:
> ```
> vect_shift_0 = vect_value >> { 0, 1, 2, 3 };
> vect_shift_1 = vect_value >> { 4, 5, 6, 7 };
> vect_shift_2 = vect_value >> { 8, 9,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106308
Ken Matsui changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88670
Bug 88670 depends on bug 112740, which changed state.
Bug 112740 Summary: [14 Regression] wrong code with vector compare on riscv64
at -O0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112740
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113324
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Keywords|
sion algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 14.0.0 20240111 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112740
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113329
Bug ID: 113329
Summary: analyzer: False positive analyzer-fd-use-without-check
with dup2()
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112740
--- Comment #14 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e1f2d58a1e2536f13d3f2ea2d7373ae62cec9125
commit r14-7129-ge1f2d58a1e2536f13d3f2ea2d7373ae62cec9125
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111003
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:96fb3908d9b8e30f8d8355fbb133d25625a0fee9
commit r14-7130-g96fb3908d9b8e30f8d8355fbb133d25625a0fee9
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109839
Donald Buczek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||buczek at molgen dot mpg.de
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113326
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
One more thing:
```
vect_shift_0 = vect_value >> { 0, 1, 2, 3 };
vect_shift_1 = vect_value >> { 4, 5, 6, 7 };
vect_shift_2 = vect_value >> { 8, 9, 10, 11 };
vect_shift_3 = vect_value >> { 12, 13, 14, 15
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113197
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113319
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113331
Bug ID: 113331
Summary: AMDGCN: Compilation failure due to duplicate
.LEHB/.LEHE symbols
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113320
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |redi at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113126
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||crazylht at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113250
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Ken Matsui
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:da19967df3ad5d123888ef24b4fd84be047df226
commit r12-10089-gda19967df3ad5d123888ef24b4fd84be047df226
Author: Ken Matsui
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109162
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||113318
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113077
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL|https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma |https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113326
--- Comment #7 from Feng Xue ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> > One more thing:
> > ```
> > vect_shift_0 = vect_value >> { 0, 1, 2, 3 };
> > vect_shift_1 = vect_value >> { 4, 5,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113332
Bug ID: 113332
Summary: [12/13/14 regression] ICE when building fcitx-5.1.6
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113331
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
These are exception handling region labels, possibly nvptx has no way to do EH.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113250
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Ken Matsui :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:df147e2ee7199d33d66959c6509ce9c21072077f
commit r14-7135-gdf147e2ee7199d33d66959c6509ce9c21072077f
Author: Ken Matsui
Date: Wed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11
Bug ID: 11
Summary: analyzer: False positives with calloc()
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113077
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113233
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by LuluCheng :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ea2a9c76a1dcffbbec6e53655bef9236d3a8e691
commit r14-7134-gea2a9c76a1dcffbbec6e53655bef9236d3a8e691
Author: Yang Yujie
Date: Thu Jan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113319
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113250
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Ken Matsui
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3e51890ef351e7fb9e836c6a48f20ca97294dc16
commit r13-8209-g3e51890ef351e7fb9e836c6a48f20ca97294dc16
Author: Ken Matsui
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113077
--- Comment #13 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Alex Coplan :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5400778f69d19a94017561c7de02510d9c0899e6
commit r14-7132-g5400778f69d19a94017561c7de02510d9c0899e6
Author: Alex Coplan
Date: Thu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113332
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113250
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Ken Matsui
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6c4882dd9453d096429cfb4652f25915a931e155
commit r11-11188-g6c4882dd9453d096429cfb4652f25915a931e155
Author: Ken Matsui
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113182
--- Comment #13 from John David Anglin ---
Although the patch fixes the udlit-namespace.C test, I think the patch
still isn't correct. I think the code should use maybe_get_identifier
instead of get_identifier. See assemble_name_resolve.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113182
--- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The allocation is completely intentional, exactly to be able to track whether
it was referenced or not. Otherwise the exercise makes no sense.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112477
--- Comment #10 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Francois Dumont :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:46afbeb81414302829fbf10c107e5466a3cf44d7
commit r14-7151-g46afbeb81414302829fbf10c107e5466a3cf44d7
Author: François Dumont
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113339
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
So I looked into the wrong part of fold, but anyways PR 23669 added the folding
to fold instead (and I just noticed I implemented it originally).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113340
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
I suppose the following would be one way to fix it:
--- a/gcc/cp/decl2.cc
+++ b/gcc/cp/decl2.cc
@@ -312,6 +312,12 @@ maybe_retrofit_in_chrg (tree fn)
basetype = TREE_TYPE (TREE_VALUE (arg_types));
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102609
--- Comment #27 from Gašper Ažman ---
I think there is an example in the standard that distinguishes those two as
far as overload resolution is concerned.
On Thu, Jan 11, 2024, 21:08 waffl3x at protonmail dot com <
gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113341
--- Comment #3 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> This could still be a bug in LLVM too.
>
> Without much more information, it is hard to decide.
I fully agree. I filed this bug report to broaden
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113341
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
I should mention that LLVM has/had known issues with -flifetime-dse so it might
be useful also to show how stage1 of LLVM/clang was being built.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113124
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113341
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
The backtrace in the llvm bug report is not very useful either.
Maybe look into that first to see if it is obvious which function might be
compiling "incorrectly". Maybe there is a bug in the new clang
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113341
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
`-fno-lifetime-dse` is already used but I get the feeling there might be strict
aliasing issues in the code though. What happens if you add
-fno-strict-aliasing ?
This code gives me strict aliasing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113338
--- Comment #1 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
NAG also rejects the code.
The code compiles with gfortran if one declares t interoperable:
type, bind(c) :: t
Note that F2008 still had:
"(5) any dummy argument without the VALUE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113341
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool ---
We need a reduced testcase.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113341
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #3)
> (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #2)
> > We need a reduced testcase.
>
> Any suggestion on how to proceed here?
Nothing in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113200
--- Comment #12 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:26a9e8cee4d20e5b08c0336439c8f69a2f06af1c
commit r12-10090-g26a9e8cee4d20e5b08c0336439c8f69a2f06af1c
Author: Jonathan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113200
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004
Bug 55004 depends on bug 113200, which changed state.
Bug 113200 Summary: std::char_traits::move is not constexpr when the
argument is a string literal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113200
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110065
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113012
--- Comment #12 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Siddhesh Poyarekar
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:db86a6009fc83e8cb21cae49c7c55fc2b1186008
commit r13-8210-gdb86a6009fc83e8cb21cae49c7c55fc2b1186008
Author: Siddhesh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113012
Siddhesh Poyarekar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113324
Roland Illig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113182
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
So, I'm going to bootstrap/regtest:
2024-01-11 John David Anglin
Jakub Jelinek
PR middle-end/113182
* varasm.cc (process_pending_assemble_externals,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113258
--- Comment #24 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f50f2efae9fb0965d8ccdb62cfdb698336d5a933
commit r14-7146-gf50f2efae9fb0965d8ccdb62cfdb698336d5a933
Author: Jonathan Wakely
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113182
--- Comment #19 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I think stringpool hash table is never purged (unless libgccjit and
reinitializes stuff), so once something is looked up, it will be findable later
on as well.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113339
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-01-11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113191
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:61b493f17e6fea5a0fb45b6a050259ca326c13a7
commit r14-7157-g61b493f17e6fea5a0fb45b6a050259ca326c13a7
Author: Jason Merrill
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113320
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Patch posted:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-January/642741.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105505
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110512
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Patch posted for review:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-January/642732.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113342
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note MSVC has the same behavior as GCC here:
```
(13): error C2244: 'Job::create': unable to match function definition
to an existing declaration
(13): note: see declaration of 'Job::create'
(13): note:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113337
Bug ID: 113337
Summary: Rethrown uncaught exceptions don't invoke
std::terminate if SEH-based unwinding is used
Product: gcc
Version: 13.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113338
Bug ID: 113338
Summary: Valid Code Rejected, bind(C) procedure with pointer
argument
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113339
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note the fold was added here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/1999-October/020476.html .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113313
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
--- Comment #5 from kargl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113342
Bug ID: 113342
Summary: Template parameter does not shadow member enum value.
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113182
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to John David Anglin from comment #13)
> Although the patch fixes the udlit-namespace.C test, I think the patch
> still isn't correct. I think the code should use maybe_get_identifier
> instead
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112477
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I see that this is actually causing lots of failures for PSTL tests when run
with -D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113301
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7f56a90269b393fcc55ef08e0990fafb7b1c24b4
commit r14-7148-g7f56a90269b393fcc55ef08e0990fafb7b1c24b4
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113322
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113322
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a2be4e155992151b60fca6969a97d6efd91e82b5
commit r14-7149-ga2be4e155992151b60fca6969a97d6efd91e82b5
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113301
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113339
Bug ID: 113339
Summary: `-a/-b` is not simplified to `a/b` if done in seperate
statements
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102609
corentinjabot at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||corentinjabot at gmail
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113308
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113341
Bug ID: 113341
Summary: Using GCC as the bootstrap compiler breaks LLVM on
32-bit PowerPC
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.1
URL:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113343
Bug ID: 113343
Summary: Float values are not correct when cross-compiling
Product: gcc
Version: 13.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113334
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112477
--- Comment #11 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Francois Dumont
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ffc5684a4d3d3c457e5d311e7088f3487cf5083e
commit r13-8212-gffc5684a4d3d3c457e5d311e7088f3487cf5083e
Author: François
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113340
Bug ID: 113340
Summary: ICE when an explicit object parameter is attempted to
be used in a destructor
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102609
--- Comment #28 from Jakub Jelinek ---
It doesn't help that the mangling issue doesn't have implementation in form of
a mangling ABI patch, that would help to figure out e.g. whether it either H or
CV-qualifiers ref-qualifiers.
Anyway, I think
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113313
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113340
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
Ever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102609
--- Comment #26 from waffl3x ---
(In reply to corentinjabot from comment #25)
> Hey folks.
> Congrats on landing support for deducing this in GCC.
Thanks!
> While there is no spec for it, after discussion here,
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113182
--- Comment #16 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2024-01-11 12:37 p.m., jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113182
>
> --- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> (In reply to John David Anglin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111550
--- Comment #4 from Patrick Palka ---
The perfect forwarding issue is incidentally fixed in C++23 mode (when deducing
this is available) after r14-7150-gd2cb4693a0b383.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113182
--- Comment #18 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2024-01-11 1:25 p.m., jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> The allocation is completely intentional, exactly to be able to track whether
> it was referenced or not. Otherwise the exercise
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113182
--- Comment #20 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2024-01-11 2:05 p.m., jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113182
>
> --- Comment #19 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> I think stringpool hash table is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113341
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113313
--- Comment #6 from john.harper at vuw dot ac.nz ---
I know nothing about either applying gfortran patches or MatterMost but
I'm willing to try.
On Thu, 11 Jan 2024, jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2024 20:18:36 +
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113341
--- Comment #8 from Jessica Clarke ---
The clang/ subdirectory should be building itself with -fno-strict-aliasing on
GCC already
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113342
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note there was a change between `clang 10` and `clang 11` which changed clang
into accepting the code. So I am 99% sure it is that paper which caused the
change ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113312
--- Comment #16 from H.J. Lu ---
I updated users/hjl/pr113312/master branch to handle function pointers.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113344
Bug ID: 113344
Summary: [14 regression] gcc.dg/pr15784-1.c fails after
r14-7139-g897b95a12b7fe5
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113344
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Confirmed, it fails everywhere too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113344
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-regression/2024-January/078983.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113346
Bug ID: 113346
Summary: [14 Regression] epiphany-elf build failure
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
1 - 100 of 163 matches
Mail list logo
