https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109966
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[13/14 Regression] ICE in |[13 Regression] ICE in
at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
This is CWG 2856 https://cplusplus.github.io/CWG/issues/2856.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84849
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114764
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
The former: I'd have to introduce checking that tracks all the declarations and
checks that their noexcept-specs match after delayed parsing has taken place.
It's not impossible but I didn't (and still
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114764
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
I don't think so, it's the same problem. You could have
struct S {
friend void f() noexcept(noexcept(a));
friend void f() noexcept(noexcept(b)) { }
int a;
int b;
};
and we'd have to track if the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114764
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114707
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
>From <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-April/649426.html>: let's
do set_target_expr_eliding in convert_for_arg_passing. Then
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
clang++ warns here:
```
[[noreturn]] constexpr void f() {}
constexpr int x = (f(), 0);
```
l.C:1:36: warning: function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18635
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94404
Bug 94404 depends on bug 110216, which changed state.
Bug 110216 Summary: tuple_size requirements for structured binding has not been
updated after DR 2386
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110216
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110216
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
This should compile:
```
struct Z {};
struct A {
operator Z&(); // #1
operator const Z&();
};
struct B {
operator Z();
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114625
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114606
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91079
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94404
Bug 94404 depends on bug 91079, which changed state.
Bug 91079 Summary: [DR 1881] Standard-layout classes and unnamed bit-fields
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91079
What|Removed |Added
at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
Last reconfirmed||2024-04-05
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Component: driver
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
-Whardened warns when -fhardened couldn't enable a hardening option because
that option was disabled on the command line, e.g.:
$ ./cc1plus -quiet g.C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12/13/14 Regression]|[11/12/13 Regression]
-bisection |
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Fixed by r12-2975:
commit 32c3a75390623a0470df52af13f78baddd562981
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Tue Aug 17 21:06:39 2021 +0200
c++: Implement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12944
Bug 12944 depends on bug 85570, which changed state.
Bug 85570 Summary: Resolution of unqualified-id in member access involving
templates fails
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85570
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85570
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Compiles since r12-3643:
commit 18b57c1d4a8777bedfe4ed47166f033e71bc144b
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Fri Sep 17 14:18:55 2021 -0400
c++: improve lookup of member-qualified names
I guess I should add the test.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114569
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114479
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103825
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114549
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110338
Bug 110338 depends on bug 114455, which changed state.
Bug 114455 Summary: [C++26] P2748R5 - Disallow binding a returned reference to
a temporary
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114455
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114455
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114479
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114479
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111426
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
I meant that g++5 emitted
111426.C:7:3: error: use of deleted function ‘D::D()’
D d;
^
111426.C:6:7: note: ‘D::D()’ is implicitly deleted because the default
definition would be ill-formed:
class D :
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103825
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67491
Bug 67491 depends on bug 100557, which changed state.
Bug 100557 Summary: [11/12/13/14 Regression] Internal compiler error: Error
reporting routines re-entered.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100557
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100557
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
Fixed by Patrick's r14-3809. I'll add the test; the patch was fixing a
different problem.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114349
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114439
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed||2024-03-25
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
Confirmed. I'm interested.
||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
Confirmed. I'm interested.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114439
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59465
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12/13/14 Regression]|[11/12/13 Regression] g++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110323
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12/13/14 Regression]|[11/12/13 Regression] Code
dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed||2024-03-20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114395
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
Right, another design principle is that () should work where {} works, and
const B {a}; works. A(b) previously didn't work so it's not really changing
meaning. So not a bug IMHO.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114395
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
darwin -> probably not P1.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111592
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109966
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
This looks like a failure of potential_prvalue_result_of to notice that there's
copy elision taking place (when initializing a field of the array arr).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110323
--- Comment #9 from Marek Polacek ---
Oh and I meant to say it's the DECL_DECLARED_INLINE_P check that makes the
difference.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110323
--- Comment #8 from Marek Polacek ---
(In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #7)
> I noticed we emit the function if we turn it into a non-member:
>
> #include
>
> constexpr int VAL = 1;
>
> template
> void bar(typename
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110323
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
Extended test. I think all 4 should be emitted.
```
// PR c++/110323
template
struct conditional { using type = T; };
template
struct conditional { using type = F; };
constexpr int VAL = 1;
static
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110031
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12/13/14 Regression]|[11/12/13 Regression] ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113970
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114114
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12/13/14 Regression]|[11/12/13 Regression]
at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110323
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
VAL is constexpr, which implies const, which in the global scope implies
static. Then constrain_visibility_for_template makes "struct conditional<(B ==
VAL), int, float>" non-TREE_PUBLIC. So with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110323
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Ah -- if we walk into TYPE_CONTEXT (t) (here: struct conditional), then in
min_vis_r we determine the visibility as VISIBILITY_ANON. Without it, it
remains VISIBILITY_DEFAULT.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110323
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
This makes a difference for some reason:
--- a/gcc/cp/tree.cc
+++ b/gcc/cp/tree.cc
@@ -5542,7 +5542,7 @@ cp_walk_subtrees (tree *tp, int *walk_subtrees_p,
walk_tree_fn func,
break;
case
||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Started with r11-291-g0f50f6daa14018:
commit 0f50f6daa140186a048cbf33f54f4591eabf5f12
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Mon May 11 15:46:59 2020 -0400
c++: tree walk into TYPENAME_TYPE.
```
template
struct
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98356
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114183
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110031
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110031
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103497
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106207
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|mpolacek at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110075
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110213
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110358
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110242
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
We're trying to emit the "no return statement in function returning non-void"
warning, which triggers dump_template_bindings:
493 push_deferring_access_checks (dk_no_check);
494 t = tsubst
||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #9 from Marek Polacek ---
Assuming fixed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113987
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12/13/14 Regression] |[12/13 Regression] Binding
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85973
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tiagomacarios at gmail dot com
---
||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Dup.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 85973 ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107457
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107430
Bug 107430 depends on bug 110107, which changed state.
Bug 110107 Summary: ICE on invalid code with lambda
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110107
What|Removed |Added
||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
This looks exactly like bug 110242.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 110242 ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110242
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
*** Bug 110107 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
||2024-02-29
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
Confirmed.
internal compiler error: error reporting routines re-entered.
0x10bc067 push_template_decl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59465
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59465
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
Started to be accepted with r0-110915-ga034826198b771:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2011-August/320236.html
which was supposed to be a cleanup, not a deliberate change to start accepting
the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59465
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
We accept the test because we do
else if (type_build_ctor_call (type)
|| (init && CLASS_TYPE_P (strip_array_types (type
{
if (TREE_CODE (type) == ARRAY_TYPE)
{
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59465
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114031
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113987
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #6 from Marek
at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113987
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
We already check !INDIRECT_TYPE_P, but here we're invoking a constructor, and
we don't check that its parameters are !INDIRECT_TYPE_P.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113969
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113969
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96496
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2020-08-06 00:00:00 |2024-2-17
--- Comment #5 from Marek
|--- |FIXED
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Fixed by r12-7574.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113966
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
/* Check any placeholder constraints against the deduced type. */
if (processing_template_decl && context == adc_unify)
/* Constraints will be checked after deduction. */;
else if (tree constr =
||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org,
||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfirmed||2024-02-17
Priority|P3 |P1
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Started to ICE
||2024-02-17
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
Confirmed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113158
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12/13/14 Regression]|[11/12/13 Regression]
1 - 100 of 9966 matches
Mail list logo
