https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96135
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
See also PR96573
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96573
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
See also PR96135
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99846
Bug ID: 99846
Summary: [11 regression] std::variant comparison operator error
for recursive type
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99846
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98860
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99833
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99835
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99835
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka ---
> But inside a SCC the order is arbitrary anyway. Note I'd only re-order SCCs
> and keep the postordering the same otherwise.
We compile leaf functions first to be able to propagated to their
callers. In
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99037
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Kyrylo Tkachov
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1a92899b08e61d503a2897f2f66b064eb84706bc
commit r10-9628-g1a92899b08e61d503a2897f2f66b064eb84706bc
Author: Kyrylo Tkachov
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99808
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Kyrylo Tkachov
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1a92899b08e61d503a2897f2f66b064eb84706bc
commit r10-9628-g1a92899b08e61d503a2897f2f66b064eb84706bc
Author: Kyrylo Tkachov
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99808
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Kyrylo Tkachov
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c611209a3422d2a2dc10bc804986db9bfb80a62e
commit r10-9629-gc611209a3422d2a2dc10bc804986db9bfb80a62e
Author: Kyrylo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99845
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99845
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
The interesting thing is that doing
#include
struct X
{
~X(){}
};
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
X *p = new (std::nothrow) X[argc];
}
properly conditionalizes this store:
TARGET_EXPR , (const
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97680
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P2
Summary|[11 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99840
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97701
--- Comment #15 from Alex Coplan ---
So fixed everywhere?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99447
Matthias Klose changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99447
--- Comment #23 from Jan Hubicka ---
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99447
>
> --- Comment #21 from Matthias Klose ---
> building with trunk 20210330 using these parameters didn't succeed:
>
> make[1]: Entering directory
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98119
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1393938e4c7dab9306cdce5a73d93b242fc246ec
commit r11-7927-g1393938e4c7dab9306cdce5a73d93b242fc246ec
Author: Richard Sandiford
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96264
--- Comment #18 from Richard Biener ---
Please somebody do it quick then (not omitting necessary testing, of course).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99828
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #5)
> > Btw, one solution would be to drop __always_inline__ after always-inline
> > inlining
> > and thus make it reliably not present for IPA inlining.
> Removing it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99831
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE: in reshape_init, at|[10/11 Regression] ICE: in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99834
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99843
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-03-31
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99835
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka ---
> At -O3 the unused 'c' remains. Likely different (recursive?) inlining makes
> us
> process a cgraph cycle in different order and thus fail to elide the output
> of 'c' (it's output first at -O3).
>
>
> At -O3 the unused 'c' remains. Likely different (recursive?) inlining makes
> us
> process a cgraph cycle in different order and thus fail to elide the output
> of 'c' (it's output first at -O3).
>
> Fixing that would need processing cgraph SCCs with an extra IPA phase in main
> optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99813
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99447
--- Comment #22 from Matthias Klose ---
this is a compiler configured with --enable-default--pie
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99447
--- Comment #25 from Jan Hubicka ---
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99447
>
> --- Comment #23 from Jan Hubicka ---
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99447
> >
> > --- Comment #21 from Matthias Klose ---
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99845
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99836
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98776
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||i at maskray dot me
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98860
--- Comment #58 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a49a96f681bf13c6e77644d4507e867f00f93fe6
commit r11-7923-ga49a96f681bf13c6e77644d4507e867f00f93fe6
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99835
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #2)
> > At -O3 the unused 'c' remains. Likely different (recursive?) inlining
> > makes us
> > process a cgraph cycle in different order and thus fail to elide the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99813
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c001c194a2f73fb32461b597e91a35f9bbcf4414
commit r11-7924-gc001c194a2f73fb32461b597e91a35f9bbcf4414
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99828
--- Comment #8 from Martin Liška ---
All right, I vanished the test-case:
$ cat 1.i
inline __attribute__((__always_inline__)) __attribute__((gnu_inline)) void *
memcpy();
void *apply_relocate_add_write = memcpy;
$ touch 2.s
$ cat 3.i
enum {
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96974
--- Comment #13 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Fixed now?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99648
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to seurer from comment #4)
> Which RTL do you want to see?
So with a cross .expand shows we expand from
MEM [(char * {ref-all})] = 4702111234474983680;
MEM [(char * {ref-all})] = MEM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99845
Bug ID: 99845
Summary: gcc8: Overloaded operator new[](size_t, const
std::nothrow_t&) is seg faulting when the allocation
fails
Product: gcc
Version: 8.3.1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99447
--- Comment #21 from Matthias Klose ---
building with trunk 20210330 using these parameters didn't succeed:
make[1]: Entering directory '/packages/tmp/guymager-0.8.12'
g++ -c -pipe -g -O2 -ffile-prefix-map=/packages/tmp/guymager-0.8.12=.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947
Bug 53947 depends on bug 96974, which changed state.
Bug 96974 Summary: [10/11 Regression] ICE in vect_get_vector_types_for_stmt
compiling for SVE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96974
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96974
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99790
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99588
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Fixed for 10.3 too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99705
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99830
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99828
--- Comment #9 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 31 Mar 2021, marxin at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99828
>
> --- Comment #8 from Martin Liška ---
> All right, I vanished the test-case:
>
> $
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98601
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|aarch64: ICE in |[8/9/10/11 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97680
--- Comment #14 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0989e99470c2a6797bacf6d04888bc9a46a632a8
commit r11-7922-g0989e99470c2a6797bacf6d04888bc9a46a632a8
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99828
--- Comment #7 from Jan Hubicka ---
> Yeah, and then maybe diagnose this "ODR violation". Still
I think we do have this kinds of divergence (like glibcs
fortification), so I am not sure we want to warn by default.
>
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99447
--- Comment #24 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jan Hubicka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d7145b4bb6c8729a1e782373cb6256c06ed60465
commit r11-7926-gd7145b4bb6c8729a1e782373cb6256c06ed60465
Author: Jan Hubicka
Date: Wed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95842
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jan Hubicka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a42a5600c5917541481c3de29a95c1cb169edc6b
commit r10-9630-ga42a5600c5917541481c3de29a95c1cb169edc6b
Author: H.J. Lu
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99845
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99845
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99845
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Alternatively, compile with -fcheck-new to tell the compiler that *all*
operator new overloads can return a null pointer. That means it always checks
for null, even for overloads that are declared as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98990
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c76d503527394839f9192ee27abbc0626b4e40d8
commit r10-9637-gc76d503527394839f9192ee27abbc0626b4e40d8
Author: Patrick Palka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96531
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a834e6d59d74ccaefbcbbed5ea7ee25305057853
commit r10-9634-ga834e6d59d74ccaefbcbbed5ea7ee25305057853
Author: Patrick Palka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98611
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:57b0df85b7e4b50198a8d3a09d57c52f0d994ba8
commit r10-9635-g57b0df85b7e4b50198a8d3a09d57c52f0d994ba8
Author: Patrick Palka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97103
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a834e6d59d74ccaefbcbbed5ea7ee25305057853
commit r10-9634-ga834e6d59d74ccaefbcbbed5ea7ee25305057853
Author: Patrick Palka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95468
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:78e6c55b0d0d2d49f489c581cf8d5a8125b28563
commit r10-9636-g78e6c55b0d0d2d49f489c581cf8d5a8125b28563
Author: Patrick Palka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98601
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99753
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jan Hubicka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f87a08caf42e45162e934c7120a677565149708a
commit r10-9639-gf87a08caf42e45162e934c7120a677565149708a
Author: Martin Liska
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96264
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97849
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Alex Coplan
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ad8c55c1df32839cf74704b68a072772b14bd1e2
commit r10-9642-gad8c55c1df32839cf74704b68a072772b14bd1e2
Author: Prathamesh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99834
--- Comment #2 from Zhendong Su ---
Hi Richard and all, thanks for analyzing these reports!
I have some more cases, and wonder whether you folks would prefer that I open a
meta issue report and append these (and others that we find) to that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99847
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99847
--- Comment #2 from ⎓ ---
The same thing is with other way around. I.e.:
void ntoh(uint16_t idata, uint8_t *odata) {
odata[0] = idata >> 8;
odata[1] = idata & 0xff;
}
results with:
move.l 8(%sp),%a0
move.w 6(%sp),(%a0)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98601
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|rtl-optimization|target
--- Comment #2 from Richard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99828
--- Comment #10 from Martin Liška ---
> ?? obviously bad reduction.
Fixed with:
$ cat 3.i
enum { false, true } * __memcpy();
_Bool kasan_check_range();
void *memcpy(void *dest, void *src, long len) {
if (kasan_check_range(len, false, 0) ||
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97103
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98990
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96531
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99839
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99813
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3753ceff562d8614a94a164b312f389812bd6cd8
commit r10-9641-g3753ceff562d8614a94a164b312f389812bd6cd8
Author: Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99227
Bug 99227 depends on bug 99223, which changed state.
Bug 99223 Summary: [modules] stdl header-unit ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99223
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99223
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99241
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
*** Bug 99223 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99786
Christophe Lyon changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99445
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a2531859bf5bf6cf1f29c0dca85fd26e80904a5d
commit r11-7931-ga2531859bf5bf6cf1f29c0dca85fd26e80904a5d
Author: Jason Merrill
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96264
--- Comment #19 from Vladimir Makarov ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #18)
> Please somebody do it quick then (not omitting necessary testing, of course).
I am working on it. It is my highest priority work. The patch is ready.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99840
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99284
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99227
Bug 99227 depends on bug 99284, which changed state.
Bug 99284 Summary: [modules] ICE in key_mergeable, at cp/module.cc:10441
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99284
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99792
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Alex Coplan from comment #2)
> Ok, I'd guess it just exposes a latent backend / rtl-optimization issue then
Yes, I would expect the same.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98601
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98611
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99792
--- Comment #2 from Alex Coplan ---
Ok, I'd guess it just exposes a latent backend / rtl-optimization issue then
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99847
Bug ID: 99847
Summary: Optimization breaks alignment on CPU32
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99845
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Keith Halligan from comment #0)
> class MemAlloc {
> public:
> MemAlloc() {}
> void* operator new[](size_t sz, const std::nothrow_t& nt) {
> return ::operator new(sz, nt);
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97653
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Actually, there is code to handle that already, just with typos and omissions
in it.
So perhaps better:
2021-03-31 Jakub Jelinek
PR target/97653
* config/rs6000/t-linux
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99818
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99785
--- Comment #17 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jeff Muizelaar from comment #14)
> re: __builtin_shuffle vs __builtin_shufflevector - It looks like
> __builtin_shuffle doesn't support constructing vectors of a different size
> than input
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96974
--- Comment #15 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Christophe Lyon :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:05de07136a8c288086def19fa7a6ed817e26c6aa
commit r11-7930-g05de07136a8c288086def19fa7a6ed817e26c6aa
Author: Christophe Lyon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99748
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Assignee|unassigned at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99848
Bug ID: 99848
Summary: Parameter packs not expanded in type-constraint
placeholder
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97653
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99845
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Reduced:
namespace std {
using size_t = decltype(sizeof(0));
struct nothrow_t { } const nothrow = { };
}
void* operator new(std::size_t);
void* operator new[](std::size_t);
void operator
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98601
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |rtl-optimization
--- Comment #3 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97653
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
So, just completely untested possibility:
--- libgcc/config/rs6000/t-float128.jj 2021-03-30 18:11:52.572091848 +0200
+++ libgcc/config/rs6000/t-float128 2021-03-31 13:55:47.199756547 +0200
@@ -90,8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99818
--- Comment #2 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1)
> Started with r11-7188-gff6903288d96aa1d.
Thanks, Gerhard and Martin.
Have you ever tried to put a tent up in a storm? Sometimes maintaining gfortran
feels just
1 - 100 of 219 matches
Mail list logo
