https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101214
--- Comment #2 from 康桓瑋 ---
In ranges#L3367:
_Iterator() requires default_initializable> = default;
This constraint seems to be redundant because forward_iterator always satisfies
default_initializable.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100328
--- Comment #6 from Kewen Lin ---
Created attachment 51066
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51066=edit
aarch64 XPASS failure list
The patch v3 bootstrapped and regression-tested on x86_64-redhat-linux and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91085
--- Comment #16 from Xi Ruoyao ---
(In reply to Bruce Korb from comment #15)
> Obviously, "print_quote()" was needed early on (1999) and then saved for
> prosperity :). Your patch is inadequate because it will have to not expand
> 'linux' in a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101203
--- Comment #3 from Toni Neubert ---
Thank you Jonathan for your fast answer.
To sad but the shared library issue seems valid.
Can shared libraries exist is a freestanding environment (like a bare-metal
microcontroller running without OS)? So
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100328
--- Comment #5 from Kewen Lin ---
Created attachment 51065
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51065=edit
ira: Consider matching constraint heavily with some parameter v3
The mentioned only one aarch64-linux-gnu "PASS->FAIL"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101223
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Right before we have:
popping range for c.0_1, restoring int VARYING
But still don't see how we could get [0, 0] for the range there.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101223
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101223
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|wrong code at -Os and above |[11/12 Regression] wrong
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101234
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Looks like the testsuite is incorrect, it should have been 'en_US.ISO8859-15'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101234
Bug ID: 101234
Summary: Two tests require en_US.ISO-8859-15 but glibc no
longer installs that by default.
Product: gcc
Version: 11.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100648
Hongtao.liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100648
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3f1a08d9d731975d4061c306837ab28d52f37c7e
commit r12-1835-g3f1a08d9d731975d4061c306837ab28d52f37c7e
Author: liuhongt
Date: Mon May
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101228
--- Comment #3 from Kip Warner ---
Thanks Andrew. I've opened an issue downstream:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/1933775
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91085
--- Comment #15 from Bruce Korb ---
Obviously, "print_quote()" was needed early on (1999) and then saved for
prosperity :). Your patch is inadequate because it will have to not expand
'linux' in a line such as:
#if __has_include()
In other
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19986
Bug 19986 depends on bug 20517, which changed state.
Bug 20517 Summary: bit shift/mask optimization potential
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20517
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20517
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101230
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101230
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:37ad257c06d88fdb810be336d212c1ab54b99dad
commit r12-1832-g37ad257c06d88fdb810be336d212c1ab54b99dad
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89198
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101230
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 51064
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51064=edit
Patch which I am testing
Patch which is in testing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101230
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91085
--- Comment #14 from Bruce Korb ---
Reworking fixfixes.c seems pretty heavy duty.
I'm downloading the GCC sources now. I'll take a peek tomorrow.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101227
David Blaikie changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dblaikie at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101186
--- Comment #5 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Sorry for the slightly different IL. I had altered g() to avoid depending on
stdio.h:
void g (int a, int b, int x, int y)
{
int c = y;
if (a != 0)
c = x;
while (b < 1000)
// without this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101186
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101233
Bug ID: 101233
Summary: ICE when using ::ranges::v3::to
Product: gcc
Version: 11.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101107
--- Comment #2 from Bernard Teo ---
Hmm, I didn't realise it was brace elision - the error makes much more sense
this way. Reporting the assumption (e.g. "`A` can't be initialized from
`*this`, assuming brace elision") would solve the problem.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101232
Bug ID: 101232
Summary: Bad error message with stray semicolon in initializer
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101218
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101230
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-06-27
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101231
Bug ID: 101231
Summary: _CachedPosition::_M_get() should not return {} when
range adapter does not model forward_range
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101230
Bug ID: 101230
Summary: ice in fold_cond_expr_with_comparison
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 12.0.0 20210627 (experimental) [master revision
:18e95d5ce:461f937b47278eaa4ca3c5507c80cca26af4b015] (GCC)
$ cat mutant.c
int a[1024];
foo() {
for (int i; i; i += 4) {
int suma = a[i];
int sumb = a[i + 1];
int sumc
33 matches
Mail list logo
