[Bug sanitizer/57774] __libc_stack_end usage is broken

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57774 --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Change what? __libc_stack_end? That would be a user error.

[Bug fortran/57749] -ffpe-trap=zero or invalid produces SIGFPE on complex zero ** 1e0

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57749 --- Comment #16 from Vittorio Zecca zeccav at gmail dot com --- You are being a little too hard on me, but so be it. I believe there is only one special case, base==0, and that there are only two ifs to put in cpow to avoid the floating exception

[Bug c++/57775] New: default argument for template parameter error for friend definition in template

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57775 Bug ID: 57775 Summary: default argument for template parameter error for friend definition in template Product: gcc Version: 4.7.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug objc/56044] Add dialect option to gobjc to prevent instance variables from posing as local variables inside methods.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56044 --- Comment #6 from Dimitris Papavasiliou dpapavas at gmail dot com --- Created attachment 30417 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30417action=edit Proposed patch adding switches controlling ivar scope in Objective-C.

[Bug objc/56044] Add dialect option to gobjc to prevent instance variables from posing as local variables inside methods.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56044 --- Comment #7 from Dimitris Papavasiliou dpapavas at gmail dot com --- I made a patch for this (as well as some other minor features) and submitted it to the gcc-patches list but, since it was ignored there I'm also attaching it here in case

[Bug fortran/57749] -ffpe-trap=zero or invalid produces SIGFPE on complex zero ** 1e0

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57749 --- Comment #17 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr --- The actual code where the original issue occurred had the exponentiation in the deep of nested loops, it would have been rather time consuming to test base==0 at the

[Bug lto/57776] New: [4.9 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/lto/pr56297 c_lto_pr56297_0.o-c_lto_pr56297_1.o link, -flto -fno-common (internal compiler error)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57776 Bug ID: 57776 Summary: [4.9 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/lto/pr56297 c_lto_pr56297_0.o-c_lto_pr56297_1.o link, -flto -fno-common (internal compiler error) Product: gcc

[Bug fortran/48786] [OOP] Generic ambiguity check too strict for polymorphic dummies

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48786 Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING

[Bug fortran/57469] Erroneous warning for unused dummy arguments used in namelist

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57469 Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW

[Bug fortran/57522] [F03] ASSOCIATE construct creates array descriptor with incorrect stride for derived type array component

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57522 Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW

[Bug fortran/57762] [4.9 Regression] Memory leak in gfortran.dg/class_array_7.f03 after revision 200084

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57762 Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc

[Bug fortran/56789] Wrong code with contiguous dummy argument

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56789 Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW

[Bug fortran/57762] [4.9 Regression] Memory leak in gfortran.dg/class_array_7.f03 after revision 200084

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57762 Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW

[Bug c++/29834] g++ thinks it is a declaration when it cannot be

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29834 --- Comment #6 from M.S. Babaei ace.of.zerosync at gmail dot com --- Hi, I'm wondering if this bug is ever going to be fixed? Unfortunately I don't know C and do not understand how inner parts of GCC works. But, it's mid 2013 and the bug first

Makefile.in missing a definition of c-family-warn

All,   I noticed that files in the c-family directory compiled during stage3 arn't using -Werror along with many other Warning flags usually applied during stage3   This to me appears to be because nothing is definng c-family-warn =  $(STRICT_WARN) so any warnings specified as parrt of 

[Bug libstdc++/55917] Impossible to find/debug unhandled exceptions in an std::thread

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55917 Yuri Aksenov yuri.aksenov at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||yuri.aksenov

[Bug c++/57746] rejected valid specialization of member function of class template (I think)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57746 --- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Andy Lutomirski from comment #4) Daniel, I'm unconvinced that your interpretation is the intended one. The definition is also a declaration, see [basic.def] p2, as

[Bug c++/29834] g++ thinks it is a declaration when it cannot be

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29834 --- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org --- You can use list-initialization to workaround it: Doh{x}, ++x;

[Bug fortran/57749] -ffpe-trap=zero or invalid produces SIGFPE on complex zero ** 1e0

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57749 --- Comment #18 from Steve Kargl sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu --- On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 07:21:54AM +, zeccav at gmail dot com wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57749 --- Comment #16 from Vittorio Zecca zeccav

[Bug libstdc++/55917] Impossible to find/debug unhandled exceptions in an std::thread

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55917 --- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Yuri Aksenov from comment #7) If it's guaranteed that an uncaught exception leaving that function will still call terminate, then the catch(...) block could be

[Bug c/57777] New: Python module fails compilation with -march=core-avx2 -O3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5 Bug ID: 5 Summary: Python module fails compilation with -march=core-avx2 -O3 Product: gcc Version: 4.7.3 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c/57777] Python module fails compilation with -march=core-avx2 -O3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5 --- Comment #1 from Dirkjan Ochtman dirkjan at ochtman dot nl --- See https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=475482 for more information.

[Bug libstdc++/55917] Impossible to find/debug unhandled exceptions in an std::thread

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55917 --- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org --- P.S. I do want to improve the behaviour, and I think we can make a change for targets where we know the behaviour is OK, but we need to check carefully that it works correctly, not

[Bug c/57777] Python module fails compilation with -march=core-avx2 -O3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org --- Please provide preprocessed source of _randommodule.c

[Bug tree-optimization/57741] ICE in tree.c:build_int_cst_wide starting in revision 200394

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57741 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

[Bug libstdc++/55917] Impossible to find/debug unhandled exceptions in an std::thread

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55917 --- Comment #10 from Yuri Aksenov yuri.aksenov at gmail dot com --- OK, [thread.thread.constr]/4 says: If the invocation of INVOKE(decay_copy( std::forwardF(f)), decay_copy(std::forwardArgs(args))...) terminates with an uncaught exception,

[Bug c++/29834] g++ thinks it is a declaration when it cannot be

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29834 --- Comment #8 from M.S. Babaei ace.of.zerosync at gmail dot com --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #7) You can use list-initialization to workaround it: Doh{x}, ++x; Thanks for the reply. Yeah, it did the trick for GCC 4.4+.

[Bug libstdc++/55917] Impossible to find/debug unhandled exceptions in an std::thread

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55917 --- Comment #11 from Yuri Aksenov yuri.aksenov at gmail dot com --- Where is that guaranteed? Where is it implemented? And here is stack trace of patched version, it seems to be implemented in __cxxabiv1::__cxa_throw (gdb) bt #0

[Bug c/57777] Python module fails compilation with -march=core-avx2 -O3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5 Julian Ospald julian.ospald at googlemail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC|

[Bug c/53083] gcc bug in moving from the SSE registers back onto the heap.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53083 --- Comment #11 from Pierre Ossman ossman at cendio dot se --- Created attachment 30419 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30419action=edit main.c We've also been hitting this, so here is a reduced test case to provoke the bug.

[Bug c/53083] gcc bug in moving from the SSE registers back onto the heap.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53083 --- Comment #12 from Pierre Ossman ossman at cendio dot se --- Created attachment 30420 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30420action=edit Makefile

[Bug c/53083] gcc bug in moving from the SSE registers back onto the heap.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53083 --- Comment #13 from Pierre Ossman ossman at cendio dot se --- This was tested using gcc 4.7.2 and gcc 4.5.3.

[Bug c++/29834] g++ thinks it is a declaration when it cannot be

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29834 --- Comment #9 from James Kanze james.kanze at gmail dot com --- Re using the init list syntax: it won't work if you have to be compatible with other compilers (like Sun CC). Using something like (Doh (x)), ++x seems to be the most portable

[Bug fortran/57778] New: Missing warning for -Wimplicit-procedure for dummy arguments

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57778 Bug ID: 57778 Summary: Missing warning for -Wimplicit-procedure for dummy arguments Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: diagnostic

[Bug fortran/57778] Missing warning for -Wimplicit-procedure for dummy arguments

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57778 --- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Additionally, I wonder whether one wants to have a means to require an explicit interface, i.e. not just an explicit EXTERNAL (with implicit interface).

[Bug c/57777] Python module fails compilation with -march=core-avx2 -O3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5 H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last

[Bug tree-optimization/57701] Incorrect optimisation of inlined function with inline assembly when cross-compiling

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57701 --- Comment #5 from sqweek sqweek at gmail dot com --- Hahaha, that amuses me probably more than it should! Thanks for chiming in Hans, it would have taken me forever to figure that out :)

[Bug libstdc++/55917] Impossible to find/debug unhandled exceptions in an std::thread

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55917 --- Comment #12 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org --- Yes it will probably work on all platforms using the Itanium exception-handling ABI, unless the OS's pthread_create (or equiv) has explicit exception-handling.

[Bug libstdc++/57779] New: vector insert fails to diagnose iterators pointing into *this in debug mode

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57779 Bug ID: 57779 Summary: vector insert fails to diagnose iterators pointing into *this in debug mode Product: gcc Version: 4.7.3 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug middle-end/57780] New: Waste work in subst_dup()

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57780 Bug ID: 57780 Summary: Waste work in subst_dup() Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: middle-end

[Bug c++/57781] New: g++ 4.7 segfaults on trivial example program

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57781 Bug ID: 57781 Summary: g++ 4.7 segfaults on trivial example program Product: gcc Version: 4.7.3 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug middle-end/57782] New: Waste work in remove_path()

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57782 Bug ID: 57782 Summary: Waste work in remove_path() Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: middle-end

[Bug c++/57781] g++ 4.7 segfaults on trivial example program

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57781 Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug c++/57770] non-static data member initializer in nested class and default value in constructor cause compiler segmentation fault

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57770 Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||larsmans

[Bug c++/57208] Latest chromium compilation fails with enabled LTO

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57208 --- Comment #30 from Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: jamborm Date: Thu Jun 27 13:49:28 2013 New Revision: 200468 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=200468root=gccview=rev Log: 2013-06-27 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz

[Bug c++/57208] Latest chromium compilation fails with enabled LTO

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57208 Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug c++/57783] New: Silly instantiation of class template when using dependent type

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57783 Bug ID: 57783 Summary: Silly instantiation of class template when using dependent type Product: gcc Version: 4.4.7 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/57783] Silly instantiation of class template when using dependent type

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57783 Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug c++/29834] g++ thinks it is a declaration when it cannot be

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29834 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||manu at gcc

[Bug driver/57784] New: GCC inadvertedly truncates source text

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57784 Bug ID: 57784 Summary: GCC inadvertedly truncates source text Product: gcc Version: 4.7.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: major Priority: P3 Component: driver

[Bug target/57777] Python module fails compilation with -march=core-avx2 -O3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot

[Bug fortran/57749] -ffpe-trap=zero or invalid produces SIGFPE on complex zero ** 1e0

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57749 --- Comment #19 from Harald Anlauf anlauf at gmx dot de --- (In reply to Vittorio Zecca from comment #16) You are being a little too hard on me, but so be it. I believe there is only one special case, base==0, and that there are only two ifs

[Bug fortran/57785] New: DOT_PRODUCT error with constant complex array

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57785 Bug ID: 57785 Summary: DOT_PRODUCT error with constant complex array Product: gcc Version: 4.7.3 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: major Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug fortran/57749] -ffpe-trap=zero or invalid produces SIGFPE on complex zero ** 1e0

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57749 --- Comment #20 from Vittorio Zecca zeccav at gmail dot com --- I did try Intel ifort and NAG nagfor, as I already wrote, and also Solaris sunf90, and all of them accept complex zero raised to an integer or real power greater than zero, without

[Bug fortran/57749] -ffpe-trap=zero or invalid produces SIGFPE on complex zero ** 1e0

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57749 --- Comment #21 from Vittorio Zecca zeccav at gmail dot com --- If the cost is the same, this is a good reason to let the library handle this special case and let the programmer think about his/her business. Shouldn't system software ease the life

[Bug c++/57746] rejected valid specialization of member function of class template (I think)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57746 --- Comment #6 from Andy Lutomirski luto at mit dot edu --- Jonathan Wakely wrote in comment #4: (In reply to Andy Lutomirski from comment #4) [temp.explicit].4 says A declaration of [list including member function] ... A definition of [list

[Bug middle-end/57786] New: Waste work in distribute_notes()

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57786 Bug ID: 57786 Summary: Waste work in distribute_notes() Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: middle-end

[Bug target/57363] IBM long double: adding NaN and number raises inexact exception

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57363 Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rth at gcc dot

[Bug target/57777] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] Python module fails compilation with -march=core-avx2 -O3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.7.4

[Bug target/57777] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] Python module fails compilation with -march=core-avx2 -O3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug target/57787] New: Waste work in ix86_valid_target_attribute_inner_p() and ix86_pad_returns()

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57787 Bug ID: 57787 Summary: Waste work in ix86_valid_target_attribute_inner_p() and ix86_pad_returns() Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug c++/57788] New: Waste work in maybe_deduce_size_from_array_init

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57788 Bug ID: 57788 Summary: Waste work in maybe_deduce_size_from_array_init Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug c++/57788] Waste work in maybe_deduce_size_from_array_init

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57788 --- Comment #1 from Po-Chun Chang pchang9 at cs dot wisc.edu --- (In reply to Po-Chun Chang from comment #0) Created attachment 30427 [details] Suggested patch The problem appears in revision 200588 in version 4.9. I have attached a one-line

[Bug middle-end/57789] New: Waste work in repo_emit_p()

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57789 Bug ID: 57789 Summary: Waste work in repo_emit_p() Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: middle-end

[Bug middle-end/57790] New: Waste work in can_move_insns_across()

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57790 Bug ID: 57790 Summary: Waste work in can_move_insns_across() Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: middle-end

[Bug fortran/57785] DOT_PRODUCT error with constant complex array

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57785 Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW

[Bug middle-end/57789] Waste work in repo_emit_p()

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57789 Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug middle-end/57790] Waste work in can_move_insns_across()

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57790 Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last

[Bug fortran/57791] New: Waste work in gfc_check_pointer_assign()

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57791 Bug ID: 57791 Summary: Waste work in gfc_check_pointer_assign() Product: gcc Version: 4.9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran

[Bug c++/57788] Waste work in maybe_deduce_size_from_array_init

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57788 Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug target/57787] Waste work in ix86_valid_target_attribute_inner_p() and ix86_pad_returns()

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57787 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org --- The first one you cannot do because of error messages that could be outputted. The second one looks correct. Again patches should be sent to gcc-patches@.

[Bug c++/57746] rejected valid specialization of member function of class template (I think)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57746 --- Comment #7 from Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com --- (In reply to Andy Lutomirski from comment #4) Daniel, I'm unconvinced that your interpretation is the intended one. Well, [temp.spec] p5 says more strongly that an

[Bug c++/57746] Invalid specializations of member objects are accepted, unlike member functions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57746 Andy Lutomirski luto at mit dot edu changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|rejected valid |Invalid

[Bug target/57777] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] Python module fails compilation with -march=core-avx2 -O3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5 --- Comment #7 from Julian Ospald julian.ospald at googlemail dot com --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6) Created attachment 30425 [details] gcc49-pr5.patch Untested fix. I have tested that patch on gcc-4.8 and was able to

[Bug target/57777] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] Python module fails compilation with -march=core-avx2 -O3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5 --- Comment #8 from Julian Ospald julian.ospald at googlemail dot com --- tested with gcc-4.7.3, and it works as well for clarification: the previous test was with 4.8.1

[Bug c++/57765] [C++11] Variadic Template Specialization does not follow the INCITS/ISO​/IEC 14882-2011 standard

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57765 AaronNGray aaronngray.lists at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug c++/29834] g++ thinks it is a declaration when it cannot be

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29834 --- Comment #11 from M.S. Babaei ace.of.zerosync at gmail dot com --- (In reply to James Kanze from comment #9) Re using the init list syntax: it won't work if you have to be compatible with other compilers (like Sun CC). Using something like

[Bug c++/29834] g++ thinks it is a declaration when it cannot be

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29834 --- Comment #12 from M.S. Babaei ace.of.zerosync at gmail dot com --- (In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #10) (In reply to M.S. Babaei from comment #8) But this is a bug, and I see no reason why it hasn't been fixed anyway. I see

[Bug c++/57746] Invalid specializations of member objects are accepted, unlike member functions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57746 Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW

[Bug tree-optimization/56982] [4.8 Regression] Bad optimization with setjmp()

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56982 --- Comment #13 from Bernd Edlinger bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot de --- Created attachment 30431 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30431action=edit another example of wrong compilation This is another example where the

[Bug tree-optimization/56982] [4.8 Regression] Bad optimization with setjmp()

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56982 --- Comment #14 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se --- (In reply to Bernd Edlinger from comment #13) Created attachment 30431 [details] another example of wrong compilation This is another example where the optimization can go

[Bug regression/57766] [4.9 Regression]: gcc.sum c-c++-common/cilk-plus/AN/sec_implicit_ex.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57766 --- Comment #1 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org --- Looks like the same situation as PR57692.

[Bug target/57753] FSF gcc bootstrap needs to use xcrun to bootstrap post-darwin12

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57753 --- Comment #4 from Jack Howarth howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu --- Actually, FSF gcc doesn't know about the SDKROOT path that xcrun sets. A change similar to… http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.clang.scm/56103 needs to be

[Bug target/57792] New: --with-native-system-header-dir confuses -isysroot

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57792 Bug ID: 57792 Summary: --with-native-system-header-dir confuses -isysroot Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug c++/57793] New: Cross-Compiler Templates and Bitfields Ask to Report Problem

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57793 Bug ID: 57793 Summary: Cross-Compiler Templates and Bitfields Ask to Report Problem Product: gcc Version: 4.8.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/57794] New: using keyword for function alias doesn't work with plus suffix return type

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57794 Bug ID: 57794 Summary: using keyword for function alias doesn't work with plus suffix return type Product: gcc Version: 4.8.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug regression/57766] [4.9 Regression]: gcc.sum c-c++-common/cilk-plus/AN/sec_implicit_ex.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57766 Balaji V. Iyer bviyer at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bviyer at gmail