https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105645
Julian Waters changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tanksherman27 at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106103
Julian Waters changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tanksherman27 at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113875
--- Comment #3 from Julian Waters ---
Compiler configure options as requested by the gcc bug site:
$ gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=C:\msys64\ucrt64\bin\gcc.exe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113875
Bug ID: 113875
Summary: g++ crash with Internal Compiler Error when compiling
HotSpot for Windows with -Os and -flto
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113760
Bug ID: 113760
Summary: gcc rejects valid empty-declaration in pedantic mode
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105576
Julian Waters changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tanksherman27 at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110734
--- Comment #20 from Julian Waters ---
cppreference at least seems to indicate it retroactively applies to C++11
https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/asm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110734
--- Comment #18 from Julian Waters ---
Oops, I meant warning: 'no_reorder' attribute ignored [-Wattributes] in my
above comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110734
--- Comment #17 from Julian Waters ---
Looking at the source of the C++ parser it doesn't seem like asm (""); is
considered a statement but rather is correctly parsed as a declaration, see
cp_parser_block_declaration and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110734
--- Comment #12 from Julian Waters ---
Will do, will save the new attribute for gcc 15 and just fix the attribute
specifier sequence here
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110734
Julian Waters changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #56717|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110734
--- Comment #7 from Julian Waters ---
I have a new attribute proposed for asm declarations that fixes this issue, but
I need help from reviews to proceed with fixing up the patch properly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110734
Julian Waters changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tanksherman27 at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110734
--- Comment #5 from Julian Waters ---
Note: Trying this with a top level asm gives me:
$ g++ -O3 -flto=auto -std=c++14 -pedantic -Wpedantic -fno-omit-frame-pointer
exceptions.cpp
exceptions.cpp:8:1: error: expected unqualified-id before 'asm'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86286
Julian Waters changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tanksherman27 at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111654
--- Comment #6 from Julian Waters ---
Sorry for the late reply, I was busy with certain things
Are we going with numeric invalid-noreturn or explicit-noreturn +
implicit-noreturn? I'm not to sure how to implement the latter, if we're going
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111654
--- Comment #2 from Julian Waters ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #1)
> (In reply to Julian Waters from comment #0)
> > Created attachment 56022 [details]
> > Patch to add invalid-noreturn to gcc
>
> Patches should be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44209
Julian Waters changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tanksherman27 at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111654
Bug ID: 111654
Summary: Introduce clang's invalid-noreturn warning
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95130
--- Comment #19 from Julian Waters ---
(In reply to Tomas Kalibera from comment #17)
> (In reply to Tomas Kalibera from comment #16)
> > (In reply to Julian Waters from comment #15)
> > > It seems like the patch also doesn't fix the strftime
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95130
--- Comment #18 from Julian Waters ---
That's great news! With regards to this patch, I'm fairly certain you have to
proactively send it to gcc-patches mailing list for it to be merged; No gcc
committer has the time to look for this issue and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95130
Julian Waters changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tanksherman27 at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110734
--- Comment #4 from Julian Waters ---
My mistake, I forgot to mention that it was indeed inside a function body. I
can't seem to figure out what in parser.cc is causing this bug, anything on
your end?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110734
--- Comment #2 from Julian Waters ---
Is this accurately described as an enhancement? This is erroneous behaviour
with something that is already meant to be a feature in gcc (applying
attributes to statements, as seen inside parser.cc), not a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110734
Julian Waters changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |13.1.1
--- Comment #1 from Julian
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110734
Bug ID: 110734
Summary: Attributes cannot be applied to asm statements
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
26 matches
Mail list logo
