https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107146
tim blechmann changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107147
Bug ID: 107147
Summary: [13 Regression] ICE in register_local_var_uses, at
cp/coroutines.cc:3923
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107146
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
This seems like it was fixed already in GCC 12.2.0.
testcase.ii: In instantiation of 'void fields_count() [with T = my_class]':
testcase.ii:18:3: required from 'void binary_visit(T, U) [with
= less_impl;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107146
Bug ID: 107146
Summary: [ICE] in build_value_init, at cp/init.cc:347
Product: gcc
Version: 12.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107145
Bug ID: 107145
Summary: Indefinite recursion in
gfc_check_dummy_characteristics/gfc_compare_interfaces
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107144
Bug ID: 107144
Summary: ICE in gfc_get_symbol_decl, at
fortran/trans-decl.cc:1623
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107130
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107143
Bug ID: 107143
Summary: ICE: 'verify_gimple' failed (Error: non-trivial
conversion in 'mem_ref')
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107130
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Aldy Hernandez :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f50d103183c551c7f9f9f20efaf2ebbf83d5e99f
commit r13-3052-gf50d103183c551c7f9f9f20efaf2ebbf83d5e99f
Author: Aldy Hernandez
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107142
Bug ID: 107142
Summary: [PDT] ICE: Segmentation fault (in next_statement)
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107141
Bug ID: 107141
Summary: ICE: Segmentation fault (in contains_struct_check)
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639
Bug 24639 depends on bug 103036, which changed state.
Bug 103036 Summary: incorrect #pragma GCC diagnostic suppression for macro
expansion and -Wuninitialized
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103036
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103036
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91669
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91669
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Lewis Hyatt :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:70e3f71a279856eabf99bbc92c0345c3ad20b615
commit r13-3051-g70e3f71a279856eabf99bbc92c0345c3ad20b615
Author: Lewis Hyatt
Date: Sat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107136
--- Comment #6 from Patrick Palka ---
patch posted at
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-October/602758.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107136
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107140
Bug ID: 107140
Summary: Potential false positive uninitialized variable
warning with -Wmaybe-uninitialized
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55578
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107136
--- Comment #5 from Patrick Palka ---
Sorry for the breakage!
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> This is most likely the fix but I don't have time to test it right now"
> diff --git a/gcc/cp/Make-lang.in b/gcc/cp/Make-lang.in
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107139
Bug ID: 107139
Summary: Time to remove #if _GLIBCXX_HOSTED guard for coroutine
for freestanding
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106949
--- Comment #3 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
I don't think your attached patch is going to work. The code assumes that it
is running within a stack segment. You can't just add a stack segment without
changing the stack pointer.
But something
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98519
--- Comment #31 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #30)
> We have to disallow all (*all*) operands that require prefixed insns, until
> we can handle those properly.
So if we can't disallow pcrel addresses in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106757
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bergner at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98519
--- Comment #30 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #29)
> (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #28)
> > All prefixed addresses, pcrel or R=0, are valid always. The original code
> > is correct.
>
> Well
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98519
--- Comment #29 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #28)
> All prefixed addresses, pcrel or R=0, are valid always. The original code
> is correct.
Well they're only valid when compiling for power10, but we
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107064
Sergei Trofimovich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107064
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Sergei Trofimovich
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4c5dcb2dee23af26288d76bf0b7fc7adc0186f28
commit r10-11018-g4c5dcb2dee23af26288d76bf0b7fc7adc0186f28
Author: Sergei
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107064
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Sergei Trofimovich
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:06e1f9097760bd78d9460312cdebf692fb92ba47
commit r11-10289-g06e1f9097760bd78d9460312cdebf692fb92ba47
Author: Sergei
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98519
--- Comment #28 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #27)
> (In reply to Michael Meissner from comment #23)
> > If we change rs6000_legitimate_address_p to return false if we have a
> > prefixed address and we are
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107064
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Sergei Trofimovich
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4b25752a2970745ccc9f7ad0294b9e19e56c5300
commit r12-8807-g4b25752a2970745ccc9f7ad0294b9e19e56c5300
Author: Sergei
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107064
Sergei Trofimovich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104605
--- Comment #15 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #14)
> *** Bug 107134 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Well. that time only canadian cross did not work. Now even cross compiler does
not work anymore.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104605
--- Comment #14 from Jonathan Wakely ---
*** Bug 107134 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107134
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99685
--- Comment #3 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to pthaugen from comment #2)
> Fixed.
Does this need backporting?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104605
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #53657|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104605
--- Comment #12 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Please stop mixing separate issues together in bug reports. If you want that
change, file a separate bug report asking for it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107135
--- Comment #7 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #6)
> Comment on attachment 53663 [details]
> Define function for freestanding
>
> std::terminate() or std::abort() or __builtin_trap()??
>
> std::terminate() has the issue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107135
--- Comment #6 from cqwrteur ---
Comment on attachment 53663
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53663
Define function for freestanding
std::terminate() or std::abort() or __builtin_trap()??
std::terminate() has the issue of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107135
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #53662|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107074
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=107135
--- Comment #4 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #3)
> Created attachment 53662 [details]
> Define function for freestanding
>
> I think I prefer this direction.
Well i guess it would only work for sub classes of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107138
--- Comment #2 from carsten.andrich at gmx dot de ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #1)
> I see the warning even without -fsanitize=undefined.
Yes. Just used -fsanitize=undefined as per the bug writing guidelines.
What I forgot to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104605
--- Comment #11 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Arsen Arsenović from comment #10)
> Created attachment 53661 [details]
> *-elf --without-headers --without-newlib should(?) provide stdint.h
>
> Try applying this patch. I'll see if it's correct
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107135
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Created attachment 53662
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53662=edit
Define function for freestanding
I think I prefer this direction.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107138
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104605
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arsen at aarsen dot me
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107138
Bug ID: 107138
Summary: [12 regression] std::variant
triggers false-positive 'may be used uninitialized'
warning
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107127
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
If anything it is the walk of the tree in c_genericize (c-gimplify.c)
Which is causing the issue.
+ walk_tree (_SAVED_TREE (fndecl), c_genericize_control_r,
+NULL, NULL);
I suspect
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98519
--- Comment #27 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Michael Meissner from comment #23)
> If we change rs6000_legitimate_address_p to return false if we have a
> prefixed address and we are in asm, we get an insn not found error:
>
> ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107127
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107108
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Can you try binutils 2.39?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107108
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107108
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Can you provided the undemangle symbol. Maybe you could use c++filt to show the
issue instead of nm?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107134
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Oh it's not libstdc++'s one, it's GCC's one.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107134
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #0)
> x86_64-elf-g++ -c b.cc -std=c++23
> In file included from
> /home/cqwrteur/toolchains/native/x86_64-elf/x86_64-elf/include/c++/13.0.0/
> cstdint:41,
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107131
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> Let me file that as a seperate bug.
Created PR 107137.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107137
Bug ID: 107137
Summary: (unsigned)-(int)(bool_var) should be optimized to
-(unsigned)bool_var
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107135
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
We should make it terminate though, there's no definition of
__throw_out_of_range_fmt.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104605
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
is freestanding, but isn't listed as being required for
freestanding C++. That doesn't mean we can't provide it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107000
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #53651|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107131
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note there is a missed optimization here (unrelated to the wrong code):
_32 = o_13(D) == 0;
_35 = (long int) _32;
_36 = -_35;
_109 = (long long unsigned int) _36;
_102 = _109 >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107135
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arsen at aarsen dot me
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107123
--- Comment #2 from milasudril at gmail dot com ---
> It would be nice to standardized the vector attribute.
Good features to have:
constexpr std::size (and also std::ssize)
template
inline constexpr std::is_simd_type_v = ...;
namespace std
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107123
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||documentation
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107123
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Yes GCC does not do deduction on the vector size attribute currently.
This part of the extension is not documented one way or the other either
because nobody thought of this right now.
One easy way around
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104605
--- Comment #8 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #7)
> Created attachment 53657 [details]
> Use predefined macros to define freestanding
>
> I have this patch locally, but I don't think the changes are
> actually
./gcc/cp/cp-trait.def
../results.20221003/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/13.0.0/plugin/include/cp/
[/home/dcb/gcc/trunk.git] $
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107136
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
This is most likely the fix but I don't have time to test it right now"
diff --git a/gcc/cp/Make-lang.in b/gcc/cp/Make-lang.in
index 38d8eeed1f0..aa84d6827be 100644
--- a/gcc/cp/Make-lang.in
+++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107114
--- Comment #4 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
I'll double check, but IIRC we throw away the loop structures at the end of DOM
and they're supposed to be rebuilt (which appears to be happening as we
re-construct LCSSA).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107136
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
Component|plugins
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107136
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|12.0|13.0
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107120
Arseny Solokha changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||asolokha at gmx dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107114
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Macleod ---
yeah, we just invoke the loop analyzer and pick up what it tells us. From VRP2
point of view, it is just not getting the info supplied from the loop
optimizer.
I see dom3 removes some code and I see
<
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107136
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
---
: plugins
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dcb314 at hotmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
I've just been having a go at compiling the new linux-6.0 kernel
with a recent trunk gcc. I get
/home/dcb/gcc/results.20221003/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/13.0.0/plugin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107134
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Although we could do:
#if ! _GLIBCXX_HOSTED
#include
#else
#include_next
#endif
to make it work.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107135
Bug ID: 107135
Summary: array::at() method should not be in for
freestanding C++
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107114
--- Comment #2 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Which is just uber-weird. The change in question removes a little subloop
which becomes unreachable. Why that would cause us to be unable to analyze the
remaining key loop for the IV's range is a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107134
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
With current trunk, you need to use -ffreestanding if you are compiling for
freestanding.
--without-headers --disable-hosted-libstdcxx says to build a freestanding
library, that doesn't tell the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104605
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Created attachment 53657
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53657=edit
Use predefined macros to define freestanding
I have this patch locally, but I don't think the changes are
-languages=c,c++ --enable-multilib
Thread model: single
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 13.0.0 20221003 (experimental) (GCC)
x86_64-elf-g++ -c b.cc -std=c++23
In file included from
/home/cqwrteur/toolchains/native/x86_64-elf/x86_64-elf/include/c++/13.0.0/cstdint:41
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104605
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #0)
> Also stdint.h in GCC is not correctly defined without -ffreestanding flag.
You can just use -ffreestanding now, and you'll get GCC's own stdint header.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104605
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
*** Bug 107133 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107133
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107133
--- Comment #1 from cqwrteur ---
cstdint does not do anything since the macro is not defined
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107133
Bug ID: 107133
Summary: _GLIBCXX_USE_C99_STDINT_TR1 macro is not defined for
--disable-hosted-libstdcxx without libc
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=772
--- Comment #23 from Andrew Pinski ---
Part of the C++ front-end issues was fixed with
r13-3046-gc823366fdb9069a54a37a3b18b65a4fa69feabfd . I didn't look to see if
all were fixed though.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56314
--- Comment #6 from H. Peter Anvin ---
Unfortunately that's not really possible given the way the way the level does
runtime patching (which isn't going to change, sorry.) At the very least we
would need a *lot* more compiler support to give LTO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59850
--- Comment #37 from H. Peter Anvin ---
One would assume that there would be __foo__ aliases for the attribute names
like all the other ones.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107114
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Macleod ---
Looks like something in the change is causing the loop analysis to not be able
to count the iterations.
> Analyzing # of iterations of loop 1
> exit condition [1, + , 1] != 0
> bounds on difference
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107130
--- Comment #5 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Created attachment 53656
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53656=edit
untested patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107130
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107059
--- Comment #31 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Still waiting for review.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107059
--- Comment #30 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Any more progress on this? Builds still fail on powerpc64 LE.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59850
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107104
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Hannes Hauswedell from comment #1)
> It seems that __builtin_constant_p does not indicate whether something *can
> be* a constant but whether *it is* a constant.
Correct.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106749
Bug 106749 depends on bug 106953, which changed state.
Bug 106953 Summary: C++23 add new headers for freestanding
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106953
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106953
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
1 - 100 of 159 matches
Mail list logo
