[Bug c++/92070] [10 regression] -fchecking=2 error: taking address of rvalue

2019-10-12 Thread dimhen at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92070 --- Comment #6 from Dmitry G. Dyachenko --- (In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #5) > Fixed. r267903 FAIL and r267907 PASS for me with original problem -- LLVM-current build Thanks

[Bug c++/92070] [10 regression] -fchecking=2 error: taking address of rvalue

2019-10-11 Thread mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92070 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/92070] [10 regression] -fchecking=2 error: taking address of rvalue

2019-10-11 Thread mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92070 --- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek --- Author: mpolacek Date: Fri Oct 11 20:53:26 2019 New Revision: 276907 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=276907=gcc=rev Log: PR c++/92070 - bogus error with -fchecking=2. * g++.dg/expr/cond17.C:

[Bug c++/92070] [10 regression] -fchecking=2 error: taking address of rvalue

2019-10-11 Thread mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92070 --- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek --- Yes, essentially, but I don't want to lose the new test.

[Bug c++/92070] [10 regression] -fchecking=2 error: taking address of rvalue

2019-10-11 Thread dimhen at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92070 --- Comment #2 from Dmitry G. Dyachenko --- (In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #1) > Will be fixed by my patch > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-10/msg00782.html > but the testcase is useful. dup PR92049?

[Bug c++/92070] [10 regression] -fchecking=2 error: taking address of rvalue

2019-10-11 Thread mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92070 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|