[Bug other/101711] Error when gcc cross compile libvtv

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101711 --- Comment #1 from bootmgr at 163 dot com --- Created attachment 51234 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51234=edit config.log

[Bug other/101711] New: Error when gcc cross compile libvtv

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101711 Bug ID: 101711 Summary: Error when gcc cross compile libvtv Product: gcc Version: 11.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: other

[Bug c++/101710] Sometimes constexpr cannot be used as constexpr

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101710 steve02081504 changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #51231|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug c++/101710] New: Sometimes constexpr cannot be used as constexpr

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101710 Bug ID: 101710 Summary: Sometimes constexpr cannot be used as constexpr Product: gcc Version: 11.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug libstdc++/101709] [12 Regression] Yesterday's patch on std::filesystem breaks windows target

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101709 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Yesterday's patch on|[12 Regression] Yesterday's

[Bug tree-optimization/101708] Suboptimal codegen when clearing struct fields

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101708 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-08-01 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug tree-optimization/101708] Suboptimal codegen when clearing struct fields

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101708 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement

[Bug c++/96496] Conversion to enum with underlying type bool produces wrong result

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96496 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- Confirmed (again with a compile time test): enum E : bool { One, Two }; constexpr int f1 (int x) { return (E) x; } static_assert(f1(6), ""); static_assert(f1(7), "");

[Bug c++/95004] using the wrong pointer to member for base classes with two bases

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95004 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Static array of base|using the wrong pointer to

[Bug libstdc++/101709] New: Yesterday's patch on std::filesystem breaks windows target

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101709 Bug ID: 101709 Summary: Yesterday's patch on std::filesystem breaks windows target Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug rtl-optimization/101708] New: Suboptimal codegen when clearing struct fields

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101708 Bug ID: 101708 Summary: Suboptimal codegen when clearing struct fields Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug c++/99804] cannot convert bit field enum to its own type in a template member function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99804 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0

[Bug c++/87547] G++ reports bad type names for bit-field members

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87547 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.0 Resolution|---

[Bug c++/78908] [6/7 Regression] template instantiation with bit-field type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78908 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gnubugzilla@martin-kaesberg

[Bug c++/71586] type confusion when bitfields are accessed from templates

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71586 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Keywords|

[Bug c++/16582] Wrong diagnostic when using "[1]" as template argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16582 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- C++11/C++14/C++98 gives: :8:13: error: template argument 2 is invalid 8 | X x3; // ERROR | ^ While C++17 gives: :8:8: error: '& p[0]' is not a valid template argument of type 'char*'

[Bug c++/49931] valid code rejected (named operator)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49931 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail||7.5.0, 8.2.0 Known to work|

[Bug c++/86825] g++.old-deja/g++.pt/ptrmem10.C test fails on windows targets

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86825 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- I think this is testsuite issue as -fms-extensions is enabled by default on mingw.

[Bug c++/79832] [C++14/17] result of subscripting non lvalue array should be xvalue

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79832 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|---

[Bug bootstrap/84257] Extremely slow compilation from gcc source code under macOS 10.13

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84257 --- Comment #9 from Iain Sandoe --- (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #8) > the MacPorts project applies the following patch to work around this issue: > https://github.com/macports/macports-ports/commit/ >

[Bug c++/85415] internal compiler error: in finish_member_declaration, at cp/semantics.c:2984

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85415 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- Seems fixed in GCC 9+.

[Bug c++/79802] Conflicting declaration with function pointers/types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79802 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|---

[Bug c++/61245] #pragma GCC ivdep is ignored with call inside the test of a for loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61245 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fwinter at jlab dot org --- Comment #6

[Bug c++/79047] loop annotation ignored in templated function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79047 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug bootstrap/84257] Extremely slow compilation from gcc source code under macOS 10.13

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84257 --- Comment #8 from Eric Gallager --- the MacPorts project applies the following patch to work around this issue: https://github.com/macports/macports-ports/commit/0641e588e989b7b3e5049ca79e354339ccb403ca

[Bug c++/83796] [7 Regression] Abstract classes allowed to be instantiated when initialised as default parameter to function or constructor

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83796 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pravasimeet999 at yahoo dot com ---

[Bug c++/70939] creating object of abstract class allowed in all versions of g++

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70939 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|NEW

[Bug c++/64372] [DR1560] Gratuitous lvalue-to-rvalue conversion in conditional-expression with throw-expression operand

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64372 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kaballo86 at hotmail dot com ---

[Bug c++/61736] Conditional expression yields wrong value category

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61736 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/64519] variadic template as the first argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64519 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug c++/64519] variadic template as the first argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64519 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |8.4 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski

[Bug c++/77437] recipe for target 'cp/cp-array-notation.o' failed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77437 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/82336] [6 Regression] GCC requires but does not emit defaulted constructors in certain cases

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82336 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||steveire at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug c++/70636] Link failure when C++ brace initialization is used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70636 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/65615] gcc says abstract class even though it isn't

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65615 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/53878] [C++11] Abstract class constructors

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53878 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2) > Fixed in GCC 7+. I suspect by r7-3590 . pr66443-cxx14-3.C testcase looks like this case.

[Bug c++/64615] Access level check error: g++ thinks the non default ctor is protected while its public

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64615 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- clang rejects this code with a similar error message as gcc.

[Bug c++/64615] Access level check error: g++ thinks the non default ctor is protected while its public

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64615 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |UNCONFIRMED Ever confirmed|1

[Bug c++/67332] [C++11] g++ rejects expansion of multiple parameter packs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67332 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- clang rejects it: :9:5: error: no matching function for call to 'foo' foo (Typelist(), Typelist(), 2.5, 1); ^~~ :5:6: note: candidate template ignored: deduced packs of different lengths for

[Bug c++/67397] GCC incorrectly accepts non-type template parameter pack expansion of a parameter pack declared in the same template-parameter-list

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67397 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- ICC 2021.3.0 rejects it. MSVC 19.14+, clang trunk and GCC trunk all accept it

[Bug c++/67397] GCC incorrectly accepts non-type template parameter pack expansion of a parameter pack declared in the same template-parameter-list

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67397 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added URL|http://stackoverflow.com/q/ | |31954078/801438

[Bug c++/53878] [C++11] Abstract class constructors

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53878 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/101697] [11/12 regression] ICE compiling uClibc-ng for h8300-linux

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101697 --- Comment #1 from Mikael Pettersson --- The ICE in gcc-11 started with: [f16897cb4b1468374d63b1a6b12d8b7be845874a] H8 cc0 conversion It changed from "unrecognizable insn" to "could not split insn" in gcc-12 with:

[Bug c++/64587] [C++11] Wrong number of template arguments when template template parameter is template alias.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64587 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- Hmm, this code starts to be accepted in GCC 7.

[Bug c++/54706] -fsyntax-only suppresses a compilation error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54706 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Target Milestone|---

[Bug c++/101707] New: deduction of template argument fails via base class

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101707 Bug ID: 101707 Summary: deduction of template argument fails via base class Product: gcc Version: 11.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug c++/53566] void template parameters are accepted if they result from substitution

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53566 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||accepts-invalid --- Comment #1 from

[Bug c++/59389] [C++11] bogus error: call of overloaded ‘Foo()’ is ambiguous

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59389 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-07-31

[Bug c++/59509] template function definition. redefinition error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59509 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- I should say this is fixed in GCC 9.4 and 10+.

[Bug c++/93211] equivalence of dependent function calls doesn't check if the call is eligible for ADL

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93211 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ich at az2000 dot de --- Comment #3

[Bug c++/59509] template function definition. redefinition error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59509 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.4 Resolution|---

[Bug c++/95009] [9/10/11/12 Regression] decltype of increment or decrement bitfield expressions are wrong and causes assembler errors.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95009 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- There is most likely a missing unlowered_expr_type somewhere in the decltype handling.

[Bug c++/95009] [9/10/11/12 Regression] decltype of increment or decrement bitfield expressions are wrong and causes assembler errors.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95009 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||assemble-failure, |

[Bug ada/70867] [9/10/11/12 regression] access discriminant in return aggregate wrongly detected as dangling

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70867 simon at pushface dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||simon at pushface dot org

[Bug c++/82467] name mangling error when using constrained and specialized template functions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82467 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/85292] multiple definitions of a default argument emitted

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85292 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |8.0 Status|NEW

[Bug c++/78908] [6/7 Regression] template instantiation with bit-field type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78908 --- Comment #11 from Andrew Pinski --- *** Bug 78943 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Bug c++/78943] Generated assembler fails with symbol is already defined

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78943 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/101706] New: bool0^bool1^1 -> bool0 == bool1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101706 Bug ID: 101706 Summary: bool0^bool1^1 -> bool0 == bool1 Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: missed-optimization Severity: enhancement

[Bug c++/101704] "Already defined" error in case of many concept conversion operators

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101704 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Keywords|

[Bug tree-optimization/101705] Missed optimization opportunity when copying lots of bitfields

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101705 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-07-31

[Bug target/100182] [8/9/10/11/12 Regression] Miscompilation of atomic_float/1.cc and atomic_float/wait_notify.cc on i686

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100182 --- Comment #37 from H.J. Lu --- I still see 32-bit test hang at random on Skylake server: (gdb) bt #0 0xf7fc655d in __kernel_vsyscall () #1 0xf7bac46b in syscall () from /lib/libc.so.6 #2 0x0804995d in std::__detail::__platform_wait (

[Bug d/101692] Referenses in Slist are not counted by GC

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101692 --- Comment #6 from Eugene Zhiganov --- ... and there is another "interesting" observation... In one one of the programs there is a StageMachine instance, that catches SIGTERM and SIGINT and there is 'honest' reference to that instance in

[Bug fortran/77693] ICE in rtl_for_decl_init, at dwarf2out.c:17378

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77693 --- Comment #6 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- I believe this is actually invalid code. One cannot initialize the pointer using the data statement as in the given example. A valid variant (which is accepted and works as expected) is:

[Bug d/101692] Program crushes at unpredictable moment of time

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101692 --- Comment #5 from Eugene Zhiganov --- Eventually I used following workaround: RxSm[] rxMachines; auto rxPool = new RestRoom(); for (int k = 0; k < nConnections; k++) { auto sm = new RxSm(rxPool); rxMachines ~=

[Bug d/101692] Program crushes at unpredictable moment of time

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101692 --- Comment #4 from Eugene Zhiganov --- investigation continues... -- 'RX-98' deregistered 107 (esrc.Io) !!! esrc.EventSource.~this() : esrc.Io (owner RX-97) this @ 0x7f845328b680<<< note addr !!!

[Bug c++/96636] ICE in build_value_init_noctor, at cp/init.c:451

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96636 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:af76342b444948ab262b276cdf083c2d2e0cebbb commit r12-2653-gaf76342b444948ab262b276cdf083c2d2e0cebbb Author: Jason Merrill Date:

[Bug c/101705] Missed optimization opportunity when copying lots of bitfields

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101705 --- Comment #2 from Jan Engelhardt --- Created attachment 51229 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51229=edit testcase, 2.c

[Bug c/101705] Missed optimization opportunity when copying lots of bitfields

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101705 --- Comment #1 from Jan Engelhardt --- Created attachment 51228 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51228=edit testcase, 1.c

[Bug c/101705] New: Missed optimization opportunity when copying lots of bitfields

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101705 Bug ID: 101705 Summary: Missed optimization opportunity when copying lots of bitfields Product: gcc Version: 11.1.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug target/97281] Mark -march=x86-64-v[234] binaries

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97281 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.0 Status|NEW

[Bug ada/97541] Ada failed to bootstrap: Error: file table slot 1 is already occupied by a different file

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97541 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug target/99941] m_ALDERLAKE is missing from m_CORE_AVX2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99941 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.0 Status|UNCONFIRMED

Compilation of rust-demangle.c fails on MinGW

The version of rust-demangle.c included with Binutils 2.37 doesn't compile with MinGW: mingw32-gcc -c -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -O2 -gdwarf-4 -g3 -I. -I../../binutils-2.37/libiberty/../include -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wc++-compat -Wstrict-prototypes -Wshadow=local -pedantic -D_GNU_SOURCE

[Bug tree-optimization/101667] GNAT bug detected in op1_range in range-op.cc during GIMPLE pass evrp

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101667 --- Comment #4 from denkpadje at gmail dot com --- It seems to work on 11.2 so bug can be closed.

[Bug d/101692] Program crushes at unpredictable moment of time

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101692 --- Comment #3 from Eugene Zhiganov --- I have reorginized my data - now references to EventSource class and it's derivatives (timers, sockets, signals) are stored in explicitly named data members of other classes. That did not help, still

[Bug target/94780] [8/9 Regression] ICE in walk_body at gcc/tree-nested.c:713 since r6-3632-gf6f69fb09c5f81df

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94780 --- Comment #14 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Xi Ruoyao : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:79184d8c57d377a242610543a2cbe4f154924be7 commit r9-9655-g79184d8c57d377a242610543a2cbe4f154924be7 Author: Xi Ruoyao Date:

[Bug c++/101704] New: "Already defined" error in case of many concept conversion operators

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101704 Bug ID: 101704 Summary: "Already defined" error in case of many concept conversion operators Product: gcc Version: 11.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug middle-end/78103] Failure to optimize with __builtin_clzl

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78103 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug d/101692] Program crushes at unpredictable moment of time

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101692 --- Comment #2 from Eugene Zhiganov --- I've attached full source, just in case. And I think, I began to understand, what is wrong with it. In brief: it looks like GC deallocates objects, which it should not deallocate, because it does not

[Bug middle-end/78103] Failure to optimize with __builtin_clzl

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78103 --- Comment #22 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:91425e2adecd00091d7443104ecb367686e88663 commit r12-2649-g91425e2adecd00091d7443104ecb367686e88663 Author: Jakub Jelinek Date:

[Bug d/101692] Program crushes at unpredictable moment of time

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101692 --- Comment #1 from Eugene Zhiganov --- Created attachment 51227 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51227=edit references to objects in associative arrays

[Bug tree-optimization/101703] New: (bool0 + bool1) & 1 and (bool0 + bool1) == 1 can be optimized to bool0 ^ bool1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101703 Bug ID: 101703 Summary: (bool0 + bool1) & 1 and (bool0 + bool1) == 1 can be optimized to bool0 ^ bool1 Product: gcc Version: 12.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED