https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92608
prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||prathamesh3492 at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91195
--- Comment #11 from Dmitry G. Dyachenko ---
r278496 fix my original problem.
Thank you
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92592
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
I think this is really a dup of bug 3507.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004
Bug 55004 depends on bug 92414, which changed state.
Bug 92414 Summary: [10 Regression] internal compiler error: tree check:
expected constructor, have error_mark in cxx_eval_store_expression, at
cp/constexpr.c:4009
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90867
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8/9/10 Regression] |[8/9 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90898
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91195
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639
Bug 24639 depends on bug 91195, which changed state.
Bug 91195 Summary: [10 regression] incorrect may be used uninitialized smw
(272711, 273474]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91195
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90840
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8/9/10 Regression] ICE in |[8/9 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92414
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90767
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Nov 20 09:55:56 2019
New Revision: 278492
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278492=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c++/90767
* call.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92594
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90796
--- Comment #16 from Michael Matz ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #14)
> Time to backport now?
Hmpf, I've actually done the regstrapping for gcc9 already but then forgot to
submit. Thanks for the reminder.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90796
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vsevolod.livinskij at frtk dot
ru
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91240
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71785
Aleksey changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rndfax at yandex dot ru
--- Comment #12 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91355
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71785
--- Comment #13 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Aleksey from comment #12)
> But adding these two flags "-fno-reorder-blocks-and-partition
> -fno-reorder-blocks"
If you say that basic blocks should not be reordered, then they
are not.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92596
Bug ID: 92596
Summary: [10 Regression] ICE in exact_div, at poly-int.h:2162
since r278406
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92596
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92372
Zdenek Sojka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zsojka at seznam dot cz
--- Comment #1
seu leitor nao suporta emails html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92566
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
The whole function can be something as simple as
mode = mode_for_vector (mode, 16 / GET_MODE_SIZE (mode));
if (this is actually an existing mode
&& !VECTOR_UNIT_NONE (mode))
return mode;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91355
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I think we have two issues. One is that if we sink something on the edge
between resx and corresponding landing pad, ehcleanup2 is upset, and the other
one is that it is really not beneficial to sink the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91433
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
*** Bug 91494 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91355
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
bb 10 into which it is sunk has been created by split_critical_edges, although
the edge from the resx 4; bb to the landing pad is not critical, there is:
/* PRE inserts statements to edges and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92236
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Sutton ---
I'm going to send a patch for this, hopefully this morning, that ties concept
diagnostics into static asserts. It wasn't as bad as I thought it was going to
be.
I didn't implement this:
static_assert
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92595
Bug ID: 92595
Summary: [10 Regression] ICE in related_vector_mode, at
stor-layout.c:534 since r278229
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92595
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92580
Paul Targosz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED
--- Comment #4 from Paul Targosz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91333
--- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse ---
gcc version 9.2.1 20191109 (Debian 9.2.1-19)
(current debian testing/unstable)
gives me the 3 movapd, whether I use -O1, -O2 or -O3, and -Os gives 2 movapd. I
didn't try with a vanilla gcc, not sure which
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92573
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71785
--- Comment #14 from Aleksey ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #13)
> (In reply to Aleksey from comment #12)
> > But adding these two flags "-fno-reorder-blocks-and-partition
> > -fno-reorder-blocks"
>
> If you say that basic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48303
MarkEggleston changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mark.eggleston at codethink
dot co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92597
Bug ID: 92597
Summary: std::fma gives nan using -march=sandybridge+ with asm
volatile
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92594
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92593
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92582
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92365
--- Comment #7 from Martin Liška ---
Just for the record, I see the failure in spatialindex package.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90867
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Nov 20 08:31:43 2019
New Revision: 278482
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278482=gcc=rev
Log:
PR target/90867
* config/i386/i386-options.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92537
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90898
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Nov 20 08:29:35 2019
New Revision: 278481
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278481=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c/90898
* tree-ssa-ccp.c (insert_clobber_before_stack_restore):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92504
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10 Regression] ICE on|[9 Regression] ICE on gcc-9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92593
Bug ID: 92593
Summary: ICE with CTAD using undeclared constraint
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90867
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8/9 Regression]|[8 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90840
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8/9 Regression] ICE in |[8 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92504
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92584
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #1)
> On Tue, 19 Nov 2019, marxin at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> > I noticed that the speed drop back on the trunk happened since r278281.
> > Would you be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92545
--- Comment #5 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
Author: gjl
Date: Wed Nov 20 08:19:44 2019
New Revision: 278478
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278478=gcc=rev
Log:
Make 0-series device specs work with older versions of avr-gcc.
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92589
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Kees Cook from comment #2)
> Is there anything to enforce a strict "only consider empty array size as
> flexible array member" mode? This is an unfortunate weakening of the array
> bounds
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92590
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90840
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Nov 20 08:32:56 2019
New Revision: 278483
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278483=gcc=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/90840
* expmed.c (store_bit_field_1): Handle the case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92584
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90767
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90898
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Nov 20 09:53:15 2019
New Revision: 278489
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278489=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c/90898
* tree-ssa-ccp.c (insert_clobber_before_stack_restore):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92504
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Nov 20 09:52:27 2019
New Revision: 278488
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278488=gcc=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2019-11-19 Jakub Jelinek
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92537
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Nov 20 10:40:09 2019
New Revision: 278494
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278494=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-11-20 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/92537
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92593
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92594
Bug ID: 92594
Summary: [10 Regression] internal compiler error: in
build_value_init_noctor, at cp/init.c:400 using
std::tuple
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91333
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92537
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
One issue that I think can pop up with the way we now make nodes built from
scalars (aka turn them into externs) is that it can possibly invalidate
earlier validation of other SLP instances. It's probably
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91195
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Nov 20 08:26:52 2019
New Revision: 278479
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278479=gcc=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/91195
* tree-ssa-phiopt.c (cond_store_replacement):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 92584, which changed state.
Bug 92584 Summary: A 454.calculix optimization opportunity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92584
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92584
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91628
--- Comment #16 from Florian Weimer ---
(In reply to rdapp from comment #15)
> Any feedback on the two options I proposed? Is the .S file variant (I posted
> last) ok?
I'd prefer the patch from comment 13, but I'm not a GCC developer. You
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90840
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Nov 20 09:55:01 2019
New Revision: 278491
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278491=gcc=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/90840
* expmed.c (store_bit_field_1): Handle the case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90867
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Nov 20 09:54:02 2019
New Revision: 278490
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278490=gcc=rev
Log:
PR target/90867
* config/i386/i386.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90796
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90767
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Nov 20 08:33:56 2019
New Revision: 278484
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278484=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c++/90767
* call.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92584
--- Comment #3 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 20 Nov 2019, marxin at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92584
>
> --- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
> (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91628
--- Comment #15 from rdapp at linux dot ibm.com ---
Any feedback on the two options I proposed? Is the .S file variant (I posted
last) ok?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92534
Kewen Lin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from Kewen Lin ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90767
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90898
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8/9 Regression] ICE in |[8 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92483
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Wed Nov 20 17:51:41 2019
New Revision: 278515
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278515=gcc=rev
Log:
jit: fix ICE with GCC_JIT_BOOL_OPTION_SELFCHECK_GC since r278084 (PR jit/92483)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92109
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
So this helps:
diff --git a/gcc/cgraphclones.c b/gcc/cgraphclones.c
index bfcebb20495..359ea53d8a6 100644
--- a/gcc/cgraphclones.c
+++ b/gcc/cgraphclones.c
@@ -1079,6 +1079,7 @@
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92090
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92592
--- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse ---
IFN_SUB_OVERFLOW recognition?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91702
--- Comment #5 from Dragan Mladjenovic ---
Yes, I believe so.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91494
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91355
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92593
Andrew Sutton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andrew.n.sutton at gmail dot
com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92573
--- Comment #1 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Wed Nov 20 13:38:52 2019
New Revision: 278497
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278497=gcc=rev
Log:
rs6000: Fix UNORDERED without NaNs, for DFP (PR92573)
This is the analogue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91161
--- Comment #3 from Alexander Monakov ---
With -fno-dce, a NOTE_INSN_DELETED_LABEL appears between the last "real" insn
in the basic block (a sibcall) and a barrier rtx:
(call_insn/u/c 20 19 12 3 (call (mem:QI (symbol_ref:DI ("ni") [flags 0x3]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92511
--- Comment #2 from jules at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jules
Date: Wed Nov 20 17:51:09 2019
New Revision: 278514
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278514=gcc=rev
Log:
OpenACC "present" subarrays: runtime API return value and unmapping fixes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92483
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92601
Bug ID: 92601
Summary: error: type variant differs by TYPE_NEEDS_CONSTRUCTING
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-checking
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92601
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92463
--- Comment #2 from Janne Blomqvist ---
Author: jb
Date: Wed Nov 20 20:01:25 2019
New Revision: 278523
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278523=gcc=rev
Log:
PR 92463 MPFR modernization in GFortran
Now that we require a minimum of MPFR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92152
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> Indeed, following testcase aborts on x86_64-linux with -O2/-O3/-Os and
> succeeds with -O0/-O1/-Og:
That testcase reminds me of 14319.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91858
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Reduced testcase:
_Complex float f = __builtin_ctanf (1.0f + 1.0if);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91706
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92090
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.0
Summary|[10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92071
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I'd say this should be fixed in the arm backend, instead of asserts it should
check whether operands are aligned and if not, perform unaligned load or store,
because the amount of spots in the middle-end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92152
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92071
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91702
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92463
--- Comment #3 from Janne Blomqvist ---
Author: jb
Date: Wed Nov 20 20:08:29 2019
New Revision: 278525
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278525=gcc=rev
Log:
PR 92463 MPFR modernization: Revert r269139
Commit r269139 fixed an accidental
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88074
--- Comment #38 from Janne Blomqvist ---
Author: jb
Date: Wed Nov 20 20:08:29 2019
New Revision: 278525
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278525=gcc=rev
Log:
PR 92463 MPFR modernization: Revert r269139
Commit r269139 fixed an accidental
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92597
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
1 - 100 of 141 matches
Mail list logo
