[Bug libstdc++/82685] basic_string_view operator""sv(const char*, size_t) should be noexcept

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82685 --- Comment #4 from Pavel I. Kryukov --- Created attachment 42455 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42455=edit A string_view literal initialization example

[Bug libstdc++/82685] basic_string_view operator""sv(const char*, size_t) should be noexcept

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82685 --- Comment #3 from Pavel I. Kryukov --- I faced the problem because Clang-Tidy warns about possible uncaught exception if I initialize a global static string_view variable. It seems that Clang-Tidy simply checks whether `noexcept` is specified,

[Bug lto/82687] [8 regression] g++.dg/asan/default-options-1.C fails starting with r253914

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82687 Alan Modra changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/82684] std::complex template specializations require C99 Complex

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82684 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/82685] basic_string_view operator""sv(const char*, size_t) should be noexcept

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82685 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- N.B. the compiler already gives the right answer when asked: #include using namespace std::literals::string_view_literals; static_assert(noexcept(""sv")); So the fact we don't say 'noexcept' doesn't

[Bug libstdc++/82685] basic_string_view operator""sv(const char*, size_t) should be noexcept

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82685 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/81758] [7/8 Regression] [OOP] Broken vtab

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81758 --- Comment #17 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com --- Hi Dmitry, That's great. I'll let you know how I get on when I return. I knew that it had to be a complicated pointer assignment or allocation with source but couldn't deduce it by

[Bug target/82693] gcc/clang calling convension mismatch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82693 Ivan Sorokin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/60336] empty struct value is passed differently in C and C++

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60336 Ivan Sorokin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vanyacpp at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug target/82693] gcc/clang calling convension mismatch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82693 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ABI --- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski

[Bug target/82693] gcc/clang calling convension mismatch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82693 --- Comment #6 from Ivan Sorokin --- I added files to reproduce the issue: caller.cpp and callee.cpp are the files that need to be compiled with different compilers. empty.h is common header. build.sh is a shell script that compiles and run all

[Bug target/82693] gcc/clang calling convension mismatch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82693 Ivan Sorokin changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #42451|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug target/82693] gcc/clang calling convension mismatch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82693 --- Comment #4 from Ivan Sorokin --- Created attachment 42453 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42453=edit build.sh

[Bug target/82693] gcc/clang calling convension mismatch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82693 --- Comment #3 from Ivan Sorokin --- Created attachment 42452 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42452=edit empty.h

[Bug target/82693] gcc/clang calling convension mismatch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82693 --- Comment #1 from Ivan Sorokin --- Created attachment 42450 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42450=edit callee.cpp

[Bug target/82693] gcc/clang calling convension mismatch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82693 --- Comment #2 from Ivan Sorokin --- Created attachment 42451 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42451=edit caller.cpp

[Bug target/82693] New: gcc/clang calling convension mismatch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82693 Bug ID: 82693 Summary: gcc/clang calling convension mismatch Product: gcc Version: 7.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target

[Bug bootstrap/82688] Bootstrap comparison failure on Solaris 10/SPARC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82688 --- Comment #3 from The Written Word --- (In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #2) > The search button is your friend. > > *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 81926 *** Oops, thanks.

[Bug middle-end/78809] Inline strcmp with small constant strings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78809 --- Comment #9 from Wilco --- (In reply to Qing Zhao from comment #7) str(n)cmp with a constant string can be changed into memcmp if the string has a known alignment or is an array of known size. We should check the common cases are

[Bug bootstrap/81926] [7 regression] go/parse.o differs between stage2 and stage3

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81926 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bugzilla-gcc@thewrittenword

[Bug bootstrap/82688] Bootstrap comparison failure on Solaris 10/SPARC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82688 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug preprocessor/58687] "#line __LINE__ ..." changes subsequent line numbers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58687 Joseph S. Myers changed: What|Removed |Added Status|SUSPENDED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/82692] New: [8 Regression] Ordered comparisons used for unordered built-ins

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82692 Bug ID: 82692 Summary: [8 Regression] Ordered comparisons used for unordered built-ins Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/82691] New: new test case gfortran.dg/graphite/pr82672.f90 fails with ICE starting with it's introduction in r254009

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82691 Bug ID: 82691 Summary: new test case gfortran.dg/graphite/pr82672.f90 fails with ICE starting with it's introduction in r254009 Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status:

[Bug bootstrap/82688] Bootstrap comparison failure on Solaris 10/SPARC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82688 Ian Lance Taylor changed: What|Removed |Added Component|go |bootstrap Assignee|ian at

[Bug middle-end/78809] Inline strcmp with small constant strings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78809 --- Comment #8 from Wilco --- > /home/qinzhao/Install/latest/bin/gcc -O2 t_p_1.c t_p.c > non-inlined version > 20.84user 0.00system 0:20.83elapsed 100%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata > 360maxresident)k > 0inputs+0outputs (0major+135minor)pagefaults

[Bug c++/80449] [7/8 Regression] ICE reporting failed partial class template specialization class template argument deduction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80449 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/82689] New: merging writes of different types to the same location

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82689 Bug ID: 82689 Summary: merging writes of different types to the same location Product: gcc Version: 7.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug c++/80449] [7/8 Regression] ICE reporting failed partial class template specialization class template argument deduction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80449 --- Comment #4 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: paolo Date: Mon Oct 23 21:37:59 2017 New Revision: 254026 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254026=gcc=rev Log: /cp 2017-10-23 Paolo Carlini PR

[Bug go/82688] New: Bootstrap comparison failure on Solaris 10/SPARC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82688 Bug ID: 82688 Summary: Bootstrap comparison failure on Solaris 10/SPARC Product: gcc Version: 7.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug other/82687] New: [8 regression] g++.dg/asan/default-options-1.C fails starting with r253914

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82687 Bug ID: 82687 Summary: [8 regression] g++.dg/asan/default-options-1.C fails starting with r253914 Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug bootstrap/82686] Debian sid powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu 4.13.0-1-powerpc64 bootstrap breaks in stage3 with unexpected requirement for bdw-gc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82686 --- Comment #2 from Dennis Clarke --- There may be a hard requirement for the "Boehm-Demers-Weiser conservative garbage collector" from here : http://www.hboehm.info/gc/ I will have resuls in about ten hours.

[Bug bootstrap/82686] Debian sid powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu 4.13.0-1-powerpc64 bootstrap breaks in stage3 with unexpected requirement for bdw-gc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82686 Dennis Clarke changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dclarke at blastwave dot org ---

[Bug bootstrap/82686] New: Debian sid powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu 4.13.0-1-powerpc64 bootstrap breaks in stage3 with unexpected requirement for bdw-gc

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82686 Bug ID: 82686 Summary: Debian sid powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu 4.13.0-1-powerpc64 bootstrap breaks in stage3 with unexpected requirement for bdw-gc Product: gcc

[Bug debug/82630] Bogus DW_AT_GNU_call_site_value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82630 --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Mon Oct 23 20:39:59 2017 New Revision: 254025 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254025=gcc=rev Log: PR debug/82630 * target.def (const_not_ok_for_debug_p): Default to

[Bug bootstrap/82610] [8 Regression] Bootstrap fails on macOS 10.13 and FreeBSD 11.1 because of abort redefinition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82610 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug bootstrap/82610] [8 Regression] Bootstrap fails on macOS 10.13 and FreeBSD 11.1 because of abort redefinition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82610 --- Comment #6 from David Malcolm --- Author: dmalcolm Date: Mon Oct 23 20:25:58 2017 New Revision: 254024 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254024=gcc=rev Log: Add INCLUDE_UNIQUE_PTR and use it (PR bootstrap/82610) gcc/ChangeLog:

[Bug middle-end/78809] Inline strcmp with small constant strings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78809 --- Comment #7 from Qing Zhao --- I have studied the inlining of memcmp and str(n)cmp in GCC, the following are a summary of my study so far: 1. memcmp is different from str(n)cmp as the following: • strcmp compares

[Bug middle-end/78809] Inline strcmp with small constant strings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78809 --- Comment #6 from Qing Zhao --- (A correction to comment 4: when adding #include , the call to strcmp(s, "a") was inlined by glibc in the header with the latest upstream GCC ) with attached testing case, on GCC farm machine gcc116, I got

[Bug middle-end/78809] Inline strcmp with small constant strings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78809 --- Comment #5 from Qing Zhao --- Created attachment 42449 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42449=edit Run time performance testing case on aarch64 this is for testing the run-time performance of inlined version of strcmp

[Bug c++/80449] [7/8 Regression] ICE reporting failed partial class template specialization class template argument deduction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80449 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug c++/82664] [7/8 Regression ] ICE when using Match7 library

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82664 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code

[Bug target/52451] gcc w/i387 float generates fucom rather than fcom for floating point comparsons

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52451 --- Comment #8 from Uroš Bizjak --- (In reply to seurer from comment #7) > Shouldn't the new test case have been marked XFAIL for powerpc64 and s390? > It fails on powerpc64 for sure. This is up to target maintainer. XFAIL will get the problem

[Bug c++/77369] incorrect noexcept specification deduction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77369 --- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill --- Author: jason Date: Mon Oct 23 19:06:37 2017 New Revision: 254022 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254022=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/77369 - wrong noexcept handling in C++14 and below * tree.c

[Bug target/82662] ifcvt is not performed on double-word compare

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82662 Uroš Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug rtl-optimization/82662] ifcvt is not performed on double-word compare

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82662 --- Comment #1 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: uros Date: Mon Oct 23 19:01:38 2017 New Revision: 254020 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254020=gcc=rev Log: PR target/82662 * gcc.target/i386/pr82662.c: New test.

[Bug libstdc++/82685] New: basic_string_view operator""sv(const char*, size_t) should be noexcept

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82685 Bug ID: 82685 Summary: basic_string_view operator""sv(const char*, size_t) should be noexcept Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/52451] gcc w/i387 float generates fucom rather than fcom for floating point comparsons

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52451 seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||seurer at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug libstdc++/82684] New: std::complex template specializations require C99 Complex

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82684 Bug ID: 82684 Summary: std::complex template specializations require C99 Complex Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/82683] New: GCC generates bad code with -tune=thunderx2t99

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82683 Bug ID: 82683 Summary: GCC generates bad code with -tune=thunderx2t99 Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: wrong-code Severity: normal

[Bug c/82679] Uses of typedefs of arrays of _Atomic-qualified types are rejected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82679 --- Comment #5 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- Probably in grokdeclarator the test for _Atomic-qualified array types should check declspecs->atomic_p rather than atomicp. (The check in the parser in the case of _Atomic (type-name) is

[Bug libstdc++/81395] [6/7 Regression] basic_filebuf::overflow recurses and overflows stack

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81395 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/82627] [8 regression] r253809 breaks test cases gcc.dg/graphite/interchange-3.c -7.c, -9.c, and uns-interchange-9.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82627 seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED

[Bug libstdc++/81395] [6/7 Regression] basic_filebuf::overflow recurses and overflows stack

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81395 --- Comment #19 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Mon Oct 23 17:47:10 2017 New Revision: 254018 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254018=gcc=rev Log: PR libstdc++/81395 fix crash when write follows large read Backport from

[Bug fortran/81758] [7/8 Regression] [OOP] Broken vtab

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81758 --- Comment #16 from DIL --- Hi Paul, Thanks for looking into this issue. I ran the debugger again. The vtab corruption occurs upon the first encounter in function VectorIterElement() in line 720 of gfc_vector.F90. Just to make sure, that line

[Bug libstdc++/81395] [6/7 Regression] basic_filebuf::overflow recurses and overflows stack

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81395 --- Comment #18 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Mon Oct 23 17:16:38 2017 New Revision: 254015 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254015=gcc=rev Log: PR libstdc++/81395 fix crash when write follows large read Backport from

[Bug c/82681] c-warn.c:1218: typo in warning message

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82681 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c/82681] c-warn.c:1218: typo in warning message

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82681 --- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek --- Author: mpolacek Date: Mon Oct 23 17:03:11 2017 New Revision: 254014 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254014=gcc=rev Log: PR c/82681 * c-warn.c (warnings_for_convert_and_check): Fix

[Bug target/82682] [8 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr50038.c scan-assembler-times movzbl 2 (found 3 times) since r253958

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82682 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |8.0

[Bug target/82682] [8 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr50038.c scan-assembler-times movzbl 2 (found 3 times) since r253958

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82682 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/82682] New: [8 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr50038.c scan-assembler-times movzbl 2 (found 3 times) since r253958

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82682 Bug ID: 82682 Summary: [8 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr50038.c scan-assembler-times movzbl 2 (found 3 times) since r253958 Product: gcc Version: 8.0

[Bug c++/82664] Internal Compiler Error when using Match7 library

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82664 --- Comment #3 from Furkan --- Created attachment 42447 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42447=edit Other two test cases that are failing as well Again, sorry about the split submit but I remembered that I've found 2 more

[Bug c++/82664] Internal Compiler Error when using Match7 library

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82664 --- Comment #2 from Furkan --- Created attachment 42446 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42446=edit .ii file for example03 Sorry, about the tar file but .ii file was bigger than 1MB

[Bug c/82681] c-warn.c:1218: typo in warning message

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82681 --- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek --- Yeah, I'm fixing those too.

[Bug c/82681] c-warn.c:1218: typo in warning message

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82681 --- Comment #2 from David Binderman --- I counted five uses of the word "chages" in the original patch. Seemingly, the word is searched for in output from the testsuite. $ pwd /home/dcb/gcc/trunk/gcc/testsuite $ fgrep chages `find . -name \*.c

[Bug fortran/81758] [7/8 Regression] [OOP] Broken vtab

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81758 --- Comment #15 from Paul Thomas --- Hi DIL, On reflection, this is OK and agrees with your diagnosis: > val_p._vptr = (struct __vtype__STAR * {ref-all}) &__vtab__STAR; > val_p._len = 0; > val_p._data = 0B; > cep._vptr = (struct

[Bug middle-end/82062] [8 regression] simple conditional expressions no longer folded

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82062 --- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou --- Any progress on this? We only need to partially revert the change it seems.

[Bug c/82681] c-warn.c:1218: typo in warning message

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82681 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/82681] New: c-warn.c:1218: typo in warning message

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82681 Bug ID: 82681 Summary: c-warn.c:1218: typo in warning message Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug fortran/82622] [PDT] ICE in structure_alloc_comps, at fortran/trans-array.c:8963

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82622 --- Comment #3 from G. Steinmetz --- Backtrace for example z2 from comment 1 : (with new snapshot, configured with --enable-checking=yes) $ gfortran-8-20171022 -c z2.f90 z2.f90:1:0: program p internal compiler error: tree

[Bug target/82673] [8 Regression] ICE in ix86_finalize_stack_frame_flags at gcc/config/i386/i386.c:12695

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82673 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/82680] Use cmpXXss and cmpXXsd for setcc boolean compare

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82680 Uroš Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added CC||peter at cordes dot ca --- Comment #1

[Bug c/82679] Uses of typedefs of arrays of _Atomic-qualified types are rejected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82679 --- Comment #4 from olivier.delande.spam at googlemail dot com --- (In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #3) > Sorry, I probably shouldn't have closed this. I guess what we want to > reject is > > typedef int T[10]; > _Atomic T a; > > but

[Bug target/82673] [8 Regression] ICE in ix86_finalize_stack_frame_flags at gcc/config/i386/i386.c:12695

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82673 --- Comment #4 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: hjl Date: Mon Oct 23 15:49:19 2017 New Revision: 254013 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254013=gcc=rev Log: i386: Skip DF_REF_INSN if DF_REF_INSN_INFO is false We should check

[Bug target/82680] New: Use cmpXXss and cmpXXsd for setcc boolean compare

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82680 Bug ID: 82680 Summary: Use cmpXXss and cmpXXsd for setcc boolean compare Product: gcc Version: 8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: enhancement Priority: P3

[Bug c/82679] Uses of typedefs of arrays of _Atomic-qualified types are rejected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82679 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED Resolution|INVALID

[Bug middle-end/39218] a surprising instance of -fstack-protector not protecting

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39218 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug c/82679] Uses of typedefs of arrays of _Atomic-qualified types are rejected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82679 --- Comment #2 from olivier.delande.spam at googlemail dot com --- (In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #1) > GCC is correct here, and this behavior is intentional: I don't understand. The comment you are quoting mentions detecting

[Bug target/82674] ICE with -fstack-clash-protection

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82674 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug rtl-optimization/82628] [8 Regression] wrong code at -Os on x86_64-linux-gnu in the 32-bit mode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82628 --- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Mon Oct 23 14:58:23 2017 New Revision: 254011 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254011=gcc=rev Log: PR target/82628 * config/i386/predicates.md

[Bug c/82679] Uses of typedefs of arrays of _Atomic-qualified types are rejected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82679 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug target/81924] [6 Regression] ICE: in simplify_binary_operation_1, at simplify-rtx.c:3678 on powerpc64le-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81924 Bill Schmidt changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/82672] [8 Regression][GRAPHITE] ICE in verify_gimple_in_cfg

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82672 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- Author: rguenth Date: Mon Oct 23 13:49:24 2017 New Revision: 254009 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254009=gcc=rev Log: 2017-10-23 Richard Biener PR

[Bug c/82679] New: Uses of typedefs of arrays of _Atomic-qualified types are rejected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82679 Bug ID: 82679 Summary: Uses of typedefs of arrays of _Atomic-qualified types are rejected Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug rtl-optimization/82677] Many projects (linux, coreutils, GMP, gcrypt, openSSL, etc) are misusing asm(divq/divl) etc, potentially resulting in faulty/unintended optimisations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82677 --- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de --- On Mon, 23 Oct 2017, infinity0 at pwned dot gg wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82677 > > --- Comment #6 from infinity0 at pwned dot gg --- > What I mean is, even if you do

[Bug bootstrap/82610] [8 Regression] Bootstrap fails on macOS 10.13 and FreeBSD 11.1 because of abort redefinition

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82610 --- Comment #5 from David Malcolm --- I posted fxcoudert's patch from comment 0 for review here: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-10/msg01478.html

[Bug c++/79937] [6/7/8 Regression] ICE in replace_placeholders_r

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79937 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added CC|paolo.carlini at oracle dot com| --- Comment #7 from Paolo

[Bug c++/79937] [6/7/8 Regression] ICE in replace_placeholders_r

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79937 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW Assignee|mpolacek at gcc

[Bug c++/82678] g++ crashes on wrong lamda

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82678 Sterge changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|FIXED |INVALID

[Bug c++/82678] g++ crashes on wrong lamda

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82678 Sterge changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/82678] g++ crashes on wrong lamda

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82678 --- Comment #6 from Sterge --- Thanks mate and apologies for the spam! Didn't know that's the version that comes with CentOS 7. I am closing it.

[Bug target/82667] SSE2 redundant pcmpgtd for sign-extension of values known to be >= 0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82667 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug c++/79937] [6/7/8 Regression] ICE in replace_placeholders_r

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79937 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added CC||paolo.carlini at oracle dot com ---

[Bug c++/82678] g++ crashes on wrong lamda

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82678 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug rtl-optimization/82677] Many projects (linux, coreutils, GMP, gcrypt, openSSL, etc) are misusing asm(divq/divl) etc, potentially resulting in faulty/unintended optimisations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82677 --- Comment #6 from infinity0 at pwned dot gg --- What I mean is, even if you do change GCC to fix the unintended optimisation, other projects' code are *still wrong* - it's only correct if you can assume the C compiler is optimising your code in

[Bug c++/82678] g++ crashes on wrong lamda

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82678 --- Comment #4 from Sterge --- Created attachment 42444 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42444=edit preprocessed code

[Bug c++/82678] g++ crashes on wrong lamda

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82678 --- Comment #3 from Sterge --- Created attachment 42443 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42443=edit preprocessed code

[Bug c++/82678] g++ crashes on wrong lamda

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82678 --- Comment #1 from Sterge --- Created attachment 42441 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42441=edit preprocessed code

[Bug c++/82678] g++ crashes on wrong lamda

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82678 --- Comment #2 from Sterge --- Created attachment 42442 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42442=edit preprocessed code

[Bug rtl-optimization/82677] Many projects (linux, coreutils, GMP, gcrypt, openSSL, etc) are misusing asm(divq/divl) etc, potentially resulting in faulty/unintended optimisations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82677 --- Comment #5 from infinity0 at pwned dot gg --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4) > [..] > It's still safe to move the asm in > > int main() { > ulong d = 0; > for (ulong i = 0; i < 3; i++) > for (ulong j = 0; j < 3; j++) >

  1   2   >