https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63438
Bug ID: 63438
Summary: conditional operator deducing lvalues incorrectly
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63369
Bernd Edlinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63342
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61877
--- Comment #5 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
Hmmm, I don't quite see how that patch could be correct. Does it do the right
thing for both f(a, b, c) and f(a, sliceval...)?
Any test would look like TestMethodValue in all_test.go, but it looks like t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61877
--- Comment #4 from Michael Hudson-Doyle ---
Created attachment 33639
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33639&action=edit
proposed fix
This fix works for me. I can't find any tests of this behaviour -- casting the
result of (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63437
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
in C++14 (a) means the same as static_cast(a).
So it is a reference at this point which means const & is better than &&.
Or at least that is how I understand this. Does clang implement the C++11 ()
rule co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61877
--- Comment #3 from Michael Hudson-Doyle ---
The problem is that the call to "m.Call" at
https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc/trunk/libgo/go/reflect/makefunc.go?revision=212853&view=markup#l133
needs, in this case, to be a call to "m.CallSlice". I do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62151
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
- C++14 http://melpon.org/wandbox/permlink/BAdrBmEG3euQLnqv
- GCC 4.9.1
- C++11 http://melpon.org/wandbox/permlink/XllfUNu0VV0mnYsu
- C++14 http://melpon.org/wandbox/permlink/qm67F6vODyADgKvQ (fail)
- GCC 5.0 20141001
- C++11 http://melpon.org/wandbox/permlink/21bPbcuXB7S87DUG
- C++14 http:/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62151
--- Comment #10 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Thu Oct 2 02:18:01 2014
New Revision: 215789
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=215789&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-10-01 Segher Boessenkool
gcc/
PR rtl-optimization/6215
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63436
Bug ID: 63436
Summary: libgcc2.c:273:1: internal compiler error: Segmentation
fault
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61489
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62056
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63435
Andrew Dixie changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dje at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63435
Bug ID: 63435
Summary: Bad code with weak vs localalias on AIX
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63325
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62225
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61489
Daniel Sommermann changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dcsommer at fb dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63342
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Oct 1 21:01:39 2014
New Revision: 215784
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=215784&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR debug/63342
* dwarf2out.c (loc_list_from_tree): Handle TARGET_M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53568
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63342
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Oct 1 20:57:44 2014
New Revision: 215783
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=215783&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR debug/63342
* dwarf2out.c (loc_list_from_tree): Handle TARGET_M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63342
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Oct 1 20:51:34 2014
New Revision: 215782
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=215782&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR debug/63342
* dwarf2out.c (loc_list_from_tree): Handle MEM_REF
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63428
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Oct 1 20:47:29 2014
New Revision: 215781
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=215781&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/63428
* config/i386/i386.c (expand_vec_perm_pshufb): Fix
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62056
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63428
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Oct 1 20:45:12 2014
New Revision: 215780
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=215780&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/63428
* config/i386/i386.c (expand_vec_perm_pshufb): Fix
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63404
--- Comment #10 from Pat Haugen ---
(In reply to Jiong Wang from comment #8)
> and I am curious about whether there are any performance change since this
> insn sink change.
I built/ran cpu2000 and didn't see any difference outside the noise ran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63306
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Oct 1 20:42:23 2014
New Revision: 215779
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=215779&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/63306
* g++.dg/ipa/pr63306.C: New test.
Added:
trunk/g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63428
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Oct 1 20:40:29 2014
New Revision: 215776
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=215776&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/63428
* config/i386/i386.c (expand_vec_perm_pshufb): Fix
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62056
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c++ |libstdc++
--- Comment #12 from Man
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62056
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jwakely.gcc at gmail dot com
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53025
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63434
Bug ID: 63434
Summary: builtins.c has incorrect parameters for GEN_CALL_VALUE
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46770
--- Comment #107 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
This problem report is closed. If you want to report a new bug, please open a
new problem report.
Using init_priority does work in general across translation units. There may
be a bug in your environm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46770
--- Comment #106 from Marcelo Richter ---
Update: init_priority not work across TUs.
It works to change constructor order in same CPP file.
Between .cpp files or between cpp and library, it not work.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63386
--- Comment #7 from TechoMan ---
https://github.com/bulletphysics/bullet3/blob/master/src/BulletCollision/CollisionDispatch/btInternalEdgeUtility.cpp
<- that file. For 3.x line would be 310 , '{'.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62225
--- Comment #5 from Sandra Loosemore ---
Thinking about this some more
Why doesn't -g always enable -fvar-tracking by default? It's currently only
enabled if you specify both -g and -O.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60132
Ville Voutilainen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60132
Ville Voutilainen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ville.voutilainen at
gmail do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60132
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63362
--- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Oct 1 17:21:08 2014
New Revision: 215772
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=215772&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/63362
* method.c (constructible_expr): Handle value-init of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63362
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Oct 1 17:21:01 2014
New Revision: 215771
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=215771&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/63362
* class.c (type_has_non_user_provided_default_constru
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46770
Marcelo Richter changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marcelo at brs dot ind.br
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63433
Bug ID: 63433
Summary: init_priority not working on ARM target
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.4
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63432
Teresa Johnson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tejohnson at google dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63422
--- Comment #6 from Teresa Johnson ---
My new code is exposing an upstream profile count insanity that is being
introduced by the copyrename2 phase.
The new freqs_to_counts_path routine is invoked only when we don't have profile
info, and in thi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63431
--- Comment #4 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #3)
> I'd be happier with a much smaller warning that only
> ever warned for floats and double literals being put into
> integral types, as per clang.
See the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63432
Bug ID: 63432
Summary: [5 Regression] profiledbootstrap failure with
bootstrap-lto
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63431
--- Comment #3 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> -Wconversion
Thanks for that. I tried it out and I got far more
warnings than I could triage.
While all the new warnings that I checked seemed technically
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63325
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55077
--- Comment #5 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
Created attachment 33637
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33637&action=edit
untested patch
Untested patch. Bonus points if we show the value before and after conversion
like clang d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63431
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55077
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63431
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
-Wconversion
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63375
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
I'v posted the SRA patch to the mailing list:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-10/msg00062.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61558
--- Comment #10 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Honza?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63306
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Oct 1 14:46:32 2014
New Revision: 215767
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=215767&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/63306
Backported from mainline
2014-08-01 James Greenh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61510
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Oct 1 14:46:32 2014
New Revision: 215767
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=215767&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/63306
Backported from mainline
2014-08-01 James Greenh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61558
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ai.azuma at gmail dot com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63430
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dcb314 at hotmail dot com
Given C++ source code
extern void g(int);
void f(int p1)
{
int i;
if (p1 >= 0)
i = 0.01;
else
i = -0.02;
g(i);
}
trunk 20141001 says nothing, even w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63285
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Oct 1 14:42:46 2014
New Revision: 215766
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=215766&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2014-09-18 Vladimir Makarov
PR de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63422
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63186
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Oct 1 14:41:49 2014
New Revision: 215765
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=215765&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2014-09-10 Jan Hubicka
PR tree-op
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63428
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63430
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63416
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63419
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63422
--- Comment #5 from Teresa Johnson ---
Thanks for the test case. Reproduced and looking at it.
Teresa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54303
Andrew Haley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63307
--- Comment #5 from Igor Zamyatin ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
> I don't think so. They copy declarations, i.e. create new declarations, and
> the different ordering of their DECL_UID values may result in code
> generation dif
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59805
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
If there's something in the preprocessor that does this deliberately for
assembler-with-cpp instead of being an accidental consequence of something
else, then it's probably working as desig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63422
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56980
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gccbugs at dima dot
secretsauce.ne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63421
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63430
Bug ID: 63430
Summary: [5 Regression] internal compiler error: Segmentation
fault
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63427
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |fortran
--- Comment #2 from Markus
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59603
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Oct 1 12:34:04 2014
New Revision: 215754
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=215754&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/59603
* include/bits/stl_algo.h (random_shuffle): Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63429
Bug ID: 63429
Summary: [Regression 5] Cannot build compiler with
--enable-gather-detailed-mem-stats
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63427
Kenneth Zadeck changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zadeck at naturalbridge dot com
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61529
--- Comment #4 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> Started with r210538.
I am seeing something similar when compiling glibc
with trunk 20141001 with only -O2.
../iconv/skeleton.c: In function ‘gc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63428
Bug ID: 63428
Summary: [4.8/4.9/5 Regression] vshuf-v4di.c miscompilation
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35545
--- Comment #25 from Martin Liška ---
SPEC CPU numbers (--size=train, --iterations=3):
First 3 columns present time (where smaller means faster) and for binary size
the same.
++--++---+-+-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63426
--- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Here's the full list (cut down to one instance per issue) of todays trunk:
gcc/fortran/interface.c:2667:43: runtime error: load of value 1818451807, which
is not a valid value for type 'expr_t'
gcc/for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59805
Bernhard Reutner-Fischer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||joseph at codesourcery dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63427
Bug ID: 63427
Summary: hwint.h:250:29: runtime error: shift exponent 64 is
too large for 64-bit type 'long int'
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63426
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62662
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59545
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||octoploid at yandex dot com
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57324
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63426
Bug ID: 63426
Summary: [meta-bug] Issues found with -fsanitize=undefined
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63362
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63425
Bug ID: 63425
Summary: Demangler crash
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: other
Assignee: unass
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63424
Bug ID: 63424
Summary: Octave -O3 build: internal compiler error: in
prepare_cmp_insn, at optabs.c:4237
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26099
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|5.0 |---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63362
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26099
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63415
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58893
--- Comment #13 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Backports of your fix would be appreciated.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63423
Bug ID: 63423
Summary: internal compiler error: in
cp_parser_abort_tentative_parse, at cp/parser.c
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63405
--- Comment #11 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Gert-jan, there is no need to rerun git-bisect.
The issue started with r215171 on trunk and with r215172 on 4.9 branch.
Can you take a look, Jason?
100 matches
Mail list logo
