[Bug c++/93667] [10 regression] ICE in esra with nested [[no_unique_address]] field

2020-02-13 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93667 --- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor --- It is easy to prevent the ICE with the following, which prevents total scalarization from happening. However, if someone marked a field with such an attribute, the encompassing structure perhaps should be

[Bug c++/93667] [10 regression] ICE in esra with nested [[no_unique_address]] field

2020-02-11 Thread jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93667 Martin Jambor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug c++/93667] [10 regression] ICE in esra with nested [[no_unique_address]] field

2020-02-11 Thread eric.niebler at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93667 --- Comment #3 from Eric Niebler --- > Is this a duplicate / variant of > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93516? Bug 93516 is not triggered by [[no_unique_addresss]] and the ICE is not on the same line. That's why I created a new

[Bug c++/93667] [10 regression] ICE in esra with nested [[no_unique_address]] field

2020-02-11 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93667 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/93667] [10 regression] ICE in esra with nested [[no_unique_address]] field

2020-02-10 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93667 gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gcc-bugs at