https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81623
Bug ID: 81623
Summary: [8 Regression] FAIL: g++.dg/debug/debug9.C -gstabs -O3
(test for excess errors)
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81625
Bug ID: 81625
Summary: GCC v4.7 ... v8 is bloating code by > 25% compared to
v3.4
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81626
Bug ID: 81626
Summary: Need effective target omp_target
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: testsuite
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81492
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81624
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|7.0 |8.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81623
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|7.0 |8.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43745
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81629
Bug ID: 81629
Summary: redefined memcpy leads to segmentation fault
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81607
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
Actually I think richi's fix is the right one. Let me test.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81604
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81307
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81623
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81607
--- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 31 Jul 2017, mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81607
>
> --- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
> Actually I think richi's fix is the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44292
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2010-05-30 05:38:00 |2017-7-31
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81477
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Mon Jul 31 11:18:31 2017
New Revision: 250738
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250738=gcc=rev
Log:
[PR 81477] Set versionable regardless of optimization level
2017-07-31 Martin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81626
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Ugh, that is going to be a maintainance nightmare for the testsuite.
Why and how are you configuring your accel compiler without the OpenMP support?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81607
--- Comment #8 from Marek Polacek ---
I'm actually testing this
--- a/gcc/cp/cp-gimplify.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/cp-gimplify.c
@@ -2314,9 +2314,9 @@ cp_fold (tree x)
/* A COND_EXPR might have incompatible types in branches if one or both
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81629
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81630
Bug ID: 81630
Summary: powl returns values with insufficient accuracy
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81614
--- Comment #7 from Jan Hubicka ---
As a historical note, X86_TUNE_PARTIAL_REG_STALL was moved to historical relics
at the time both current designs (Penium 4 and Athlon) were using
PARTIAL_REG_DEPENDENCY. I believed that main reason for this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81627
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |amker at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81622
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81604
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jul 31 08:24:58 2017
New Revision: 250728
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250728=gcc=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/81604
* ubsan.c (ubsan_type_descriptor): For
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81607
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49857
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81607
--- Comment #9 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 31 Jul 2017, mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81607
>
> --- Comment #8 from Marek Polacek ---
> I'm actually testing this
>
> ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81629
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81614
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77346
Arseny Solokha changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||8.0
Summary|[7/8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81625
--- Comment #1 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
Created attachment 41868
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41868=edit
Assembly as generated by 3.4.6 for reference.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81604
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jul 31 08:46:29 2017
New Revision: 250729
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250729=gcc=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/81604
* ubsan.c (ubsan_type_descriptor): For
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81530
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81629
--- Comment #1 from Frédéric Besson ---
Created attachment 41869
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41869=edit
preprcessed source
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81607
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|ASSIGNED
/local/gcc-trunk/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/8.0.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc-source-trunk/configure --enable-languages=c,c++,lto
--prefix=/usr/local/gcc-trunk --disable-bootstrap
Thread model: posix
gcc version 8.0.0 20170731 (experimental) [trunk revision
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81604
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jul 31 08:56:03 2017
New Revision: 250732
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250732=gcc=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/81604
* ubsan.c (ubsan_type_descriptor): For
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81628
Bug ID: 81628
Summary: Backport r250637 and r250638 to the powerpcspe* target
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81581
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81629
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81588
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #41860|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81607
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
cp_genericize_r does this fix-up too, and so has to cp_fold, but apparently
what's in cp_fold isn't enough.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81604
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jul 31 09:29:58 2017
New Revision: 250733
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250733=gcc=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/81604
* ubsan.c (ubsan_type_descriptor): For
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81631
Bug ID: 81631
Summary: -Wcast-qual false positive for pointer to array
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81297
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
So we fold (plus -1 -2147483648) with type 'int' and TYPE_OVERFLOW_WRAPS. That
gets int_const_binop to set TREE_OVERFLOW (because generally fold only looks at
the SIGN and not TYPE_OVERFLOW_* when setting
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81624
Bug ID: 81624
Summary: [8 Regression] FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr59501-3a.c
scan-assembler-not and[^\n\r]*sp
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81592
--- Comment #2 from Arnd Bergmann ---
I have scanned the linux kernel sources for related bogus warnings and found
six others like this one that do not show up using gcc-7.1.1 without UBSAN but
do show up with UBSAN added in:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81630
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81400
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81603
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jul 31 08:22:14 2017
New Revision: 250727
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250727=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/81603
* ipa-polymorphic-call.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81627
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81530
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Mon Jul 31 08:53:00 2017
New Revision: 250730
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250730=gcc=rev
Log:
Do UBSAN sanitization just when current_function_decl != NULL_TREE (PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81581
--- Comment #2 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Mon Jul 31 09:34:36 2017
New Revision: 250735
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250735=gcc=rev
Log:
2017-07-31 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/81581
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25967
--- Comment #17 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Mon Jul 31 10:22:41 2017
New Revision: 250736
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250736=gcc=rev
Log:
PR target/25967
* config/i386/i386.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81607
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25967
--- Comment #19 from Daniel Santos ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #18)
> Implemented for gcc 8.
Awesome! There are actually a number of times over the years that I've wished
this were implemented, thanks! :)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81626
--- Comment #1 from Tom de Vries ---
Created attachment 41871
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41871=edit
Tentative patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81617
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|8.0 |7.0
Target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25967
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81477
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81599
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81632
Bug ID: 81632
Summary: spurious -Wterminate warning about throw in destructor
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81599
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Mon Jul 31 13:44:16 2017
New Revision: 250743
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250743=gcc=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/81599
* include/bits/stl_stack.h: Fix typo.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81618
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81633
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
In -fdump-tree-vect-details, the difference with this commit is:
--- pr81633.c.149t.vect.239539 2017-07-31 12:00:11.0 -0400
+++ pr81633.c.149t.vect.239542 2017-07-31 12:00:33.0 -0400
@@
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81634
Bug ID: 81634
Summary: Some types are incorrectly detected as not standard
layout
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81633
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81622
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The aligned computation also looks like invalid IL, BIT_AND_EXPR should not
have pointer arguments I believe (though please double check with Richard), so
it should be first cast to corresponding integral
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81626
--- Comment #4 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Thomas Schwinge from comment #3)
> Yeah, I suppose you just need to remove a "--disable-multilib" from your
> nvptx offloading GCC build configuration, so that the "mgomp" multilib gets
> built
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81490
--- Comment #15 from Uroš Bizjak ---
I'm testing the following patch:
--cut here--
Index: i386.c
===
--- i386.c (revision 250745)
+++ i386.c (working copy)
@@ -19421,8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81615
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #3 from Thomas Koenig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81622
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81599
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81633
Bug ID: 81633
Summary: Incorrect floating point result with tree vectoriser
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81622
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81400
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81615
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81626
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|openacc |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81307
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25967
--- Comment #20 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Mon Jul 31 13:11:59 2017
New Revision: 250742
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250742=gcc=rev
Log:
PR target/25967
* config/i386/i386.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81591
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I think we need a reproducer for this. Can you provide something?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81591
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Before that is available, perhaps backtrace from the gomp_fatal call in the
_LIBGOMP_CHECKING_ enabled build might be also useful.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81624
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|hjl at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at redhat dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25967
--- Comment #21 from Uroš Bizjak ---
The above patch is needed to pass arguments to a naked function.
Please note that arguments can be reliably passed only in registers, so regparm
convention is necessary for x86_32.
gcc.target/i386/naked-3.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81599
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51515
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81622
--- Comment #1 from Bill Schmidt ---
Do you see the same behavior with "vec_ld (1, 2);" ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81622
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |wschmidt at gcc dot
gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81622
--- Comment #4 from Bill Schmidt ---
Created attachment 41874
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41874=edit
Patch under test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81615
--- Comment #2 from Ben Barrowes ---
Then how does one get a preprocessed/savetemp file from an existing *.f90 file?
In the case of C, preprocessed and temp files have different extensions and are
thus easily identified after compiling. For
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81307
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Looking at gdb I see though that the block_address_function_relative variable
is computed from the object format, so I'm afraid it has to be relative.
Another option is to pretend there isn't just one
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81626
--- Comment #5 from Thomas Schwinge ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #4)
> (In reply to Thomas Schwinge from comment #3)
> > Yeah, I suppose you just need to remove a "--disable-multilib" from your
> > nvptx offloading GCC build
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81622
--- Comment #11 from Bill Schmidt ---
I went spelunking and found that the ARRAY_TYPE change was added here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc?view=revision=237077. Looks like a
C++ implementation detail.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81622
--- Comment #12 from Bill Schmidt ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #9)
> I take back the ARRAY_TYPE thing, apparently it is different for C vs. C++,
> in C one always sees there POINTER_TYPE, while in C++ always ARRAY_TYPE.
> Anyway,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80130
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81633
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I'm afraid the tree-vect-slp.c change is completely wrong, the original change
in
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-08/msg01090.html if the oprnd == NULL
has child_index++; looks reasonable to me. It
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79688
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29970
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79667
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81636
Bug ID: 81636
Summary: Confusing warning message containing "#‘obj_type_ref’
not supported by expression#"
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81622
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I take back the ARRAY_TYPE thing, apparently it is different for C vs. C++, in
C one always sees there POINTER_TYPE, while in C++ always ARRAY_TYPE.
Anyway, your patch seems to be wrong, POINTER_TYPE_P's
1 - 100 of 133 matches
Mail list logo