https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66638
--- Comment #2 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
It is an assertion failure, only I had difficualty in reproducing the issue. I
got below link error when doing profiledbootstrap with given configuration
options:
/tmp/cc3NzkDN.ltrans0.ltrans.o: I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2
Bug ID: 2
Summary: Request: Change #error directive displaying
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66658
--- Comment #1 from Martin Sebor ---
See also pr64639 (which this bug may be a duplicate of).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1
--- Comment #7 from Pádraig Brady ---
Created attachment 35852
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35852&action=edit
reproducer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1
--- Comment #4 from Pádraig Brady ---
I should note that I worked around the issue by increasing the allocation for
the structure on the heap up to a multiple of alignof(the_struct). See:
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=gnulib.git;a=commitd
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1
--- Comment #3 from Pádraig Brady ---
Created attachment 35851
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35851&action=edit
disassembly of forced good mem access
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1
--- Comment #2 from Pádraig Brady ---
Created attachment 35850
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35850&action=edit
disassembly of problematic mem access
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1
--- Comment #1 from Pádraig Brady ---
Created attachment 35849
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35849&action=edit
summary code (does not reproduce issue)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1
Bug ID: 1
Summary: incorrect memory access in optimization with flexible
array member
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66653
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c++ |debug
--- Comment #3 from Aldy Hernande
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65664
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65771
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65924
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65979
--- Comment #38 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #37)
> Kaz, could you please add this to your test runs? For me it's a bit
> difficult to do proper testing at the moment.
I'm testing the patch now. I'll report back
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48808
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39585
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49437
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40836
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43722
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45447
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49799
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||david.gilbert at linaro dot org
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48803
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=0
Bug ID: 0
Summary: [ia64] Speculative load not checked before use,
leading to a NaT Consumption Vector interruption
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66659
Bug ID: 66659
Summary: Accepts invalid when undeduced context encountered
deducing from a trailing parameter pack
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66563
--- Comment #35 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #33)
> I see, thanks. In this case, could you please add a comment e.g.:
>
> ;; Loads of the GOTPC relocation values must not be optimized away
> ;; by e.g. any kind o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66528
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66528
--- Comment #6 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
Author: manu
Date: Wed Jun 24 22:16:42 2015
New Revision: 224926
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224926&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
The problem is that diagnostic_action_after_output tries to delete th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48956
--- Comment #17 from Matt Kline ---
Thanks for the info and such a quick response! I'll see if I can do the
required legwork.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66563
--- Comment #34 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
Author: kkojima
Date: Wed Jun 24 22:11:04 2015
New Revision: 224925
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224925&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/66563
* [SH] Add a new operand to GOTaddr2picreg so to avoi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48956
--- Comment #16 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Matt Kline from comment #15)
> > Fixed for GCC 6.
>
> May I ask why this is being deferred until GCC 6.x? I'll readily admit that
> I'm not well-versed in the GCC release cycle, but this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48956
Matt Kline changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||matt at bitbashing dot io
--- Comment #15 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59833
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unass
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64172
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ra
Component|target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65358
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66658
Bug ID: 66658
Summary: missing -Wunused-value negating a function result in a
comma expression
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58133
--- Comment #5 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
Oh and Kyrylo fixed up vfp.md last year too. So it's only ARM state that
remains. I have a few patches in flight that I'm testing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58133
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66605
--- Comment #10 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #9)
> I still think this is a latent bug in the way that Fortran is generating the
> PARAM_DECL for time, but if the Fortran maintainers are not interested
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66657
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
What are you trying to do with the assembly after the fact?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66605
--- Comment #9 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #8)
> > If so, then the ICE was not caused by my diagnostic changes, it just
> > exposes a
> > problem that has been latent or introduced later. Thus, I'm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66657
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
>There should be a gcc command line option to generate the assembly language
>output of the lto compiler.
Use -save-temps.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66657
Bug ID: 66657
Summary: Feature request - assembly output from lto compiler
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66654
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66647
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65919
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65919
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Jun 24 20:24:01 2015
New Revision: 224922
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224922&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/65919
* mangle.c (mangle_decl): Always SET_IDENTIFI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66656
Daniel Krügler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.kruegler@googlemail.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66647
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Jun 24 20:23:53 2015
New Revision: 224921
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224921&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/66647
* pt.c (dependent_type_p_r): Check for depend
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66644
--- Comment #2 from Daniel Krügler ---
The problem also exists in the current HEAD (Tested for gcc HEAD 6.0.0 20150623
(experimental))
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65879
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66501
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66542
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66647
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Jun 24 19:59:28 2015
New Revision: 224917
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224917&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/66647
* pt.c (dependent_type_p_r): Check for depend
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66647
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66643
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66653
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Mil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66412
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |segher at gcc dot
gnu.org
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66605
--- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> If so, then the ICE was not caused by my diagnostic changes, it just exposes a
> problem that has been latent or introduced later. Thus, I'm not planning to
> investigate further.
Well, I think that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66653
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66653
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66654
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Mil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66654
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66605
--- Comment #7 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #5)
> If I understand correctly the above statement, -Wunused-parameter should not
> emit a warning for the test in comment 0: there is no parameter. The w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66605
--- Comment #6 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
Another alternative is to add support for printing %D to gfc_format_decoder, it
is a matter of adding something like:
case 'D':
if (DECL_NAME (t))
{
pp_string (pp, lang_hooks.decl_printable_n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51911
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66656
Bug ID: 66656
Summary: static constexpr array member: cannot get size via
constexpr function
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66605
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> BTW, is the resulting warning actually correct?
According the gfortran manual
-Wunused-parameter
Contrary to gcc's meaning of -Wunused-parameter, gfortran's implementation of
this option does not w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66617
--- Comment #5 from DB ---
Created attachment 35847
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35847&action=edit
-save-temps output files plus the triggering cpp file
see corresponding -v output added in latest comment. Please advise w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66617
--- Comment #4 from DB ---
Attaching verbose output and tempfiles as recommended by bug reporting guide.
$ gcc -v -save-temps -std=c++11 virtual2.cpp -o virtual2.exe
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=C:\msys64\mingw64\bin\gcc.exe
COLLECT_LTO_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66605
--- Comment #4 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
This is the warning we get when "fixed":
/home/manuel/test3/src/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/wunused-parameter.f90:8:0:
SUBROUTINE sub (neq, time, y, dydt)
^
Warning: unused parameter ‘time’ [-Wunused-p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66655
Bug ID: 66655
Summary: [5.1 Regression] miscompilation due to ipa-ra on
MinGW
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66605
--- Comment #3 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
BTW, is the resulting warning actually correct?
++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dcb314 at hotmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 35845
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35845&action=edit
gzipped C++ source code
For gcc trunk dated 20150624, I get
$ ../results/bin
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dcb314 at hotmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 35844
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35844&action=edit
gzipped C++ source code
For gcc trunk dated 20150624, I get the fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66652
Bug ID: 66652
Summary: try_transform_to_exit_first_loop_alt generates
incorrect loop
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66412
--- Comment #7 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> I bet the bug is in whatever creates the mode mismatch.
I don't think so. Combiner somehow mixes up i1src, please see Comment #6.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66412
--- Comment #6 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Please note that combine already calls propagate_for_debug with wrong i1src:
reakpoint 3, internal_error (gmsgid=gmsgid@entry=0x1622837 "in %s, at %s:%d")
at /home/uros/gcc-svn/trunk/gcc/diagnostic.c:1266
1266
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66412
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I bet the bug is in whatever creates the mode mismatch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66482
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66412
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66650
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66412
--- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak ---
This testcase exposes latent problem in combine pass in conjunction with debug.
We start with:
[...]
(insn 8 7 9 2 (set (reg:QI 95)
(eq:QI (reg:CCZ 17 flags)
(const_int 0 [0]))) pr66412.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66651
timocafe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66651
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66501
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Jun 24 15:41:52 2015
New Revision: 224906
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224906&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/66501
* init.c (vec_copy_assign_is_trivial): New.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66501
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Jun 24 15:41:10 2015
New Revision: 224905
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224905&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/66501
* init.c (vec_copy_assign_is_trivial): New.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66501
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Jun 24 15:40:08 2015
New Revision: 224904
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224904&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/66501
* class.c (type_has_nontrivial_assignment): R
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66651
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dje at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65750
--- Comment #8 from Paolo Carlini ---
Fixed in trunk so far.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65750
--- Comment #7 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Wed Jun 24 15:11:06 2015
New Revision: 224901
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224901&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
/cp
2015-06-24 Adam Butcher
PR c++/65750
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66651
Bug ID: 66651
Summary: altivec.h + c++11 r
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: blocker
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66642
--- Comment #3 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 35843
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35843&action=edit
[2/2] Tentative patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66642
--- Comment #2 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 35842
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35842&action=edit
[1/2] Tentative patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66650
Bug ID: 66650
Summary: libgfortran: warning: left shift of negative value
[-Wshift-negative-value]
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66563
--- Comment #33 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #32)
I see, thanks. In this case, could you please add a comment e.g.:
;; Loads of the GOTPC relocation values must not be optimized away
;; by e.g. any kind of CSE a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65979
--- Comment #37 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #36)
> It seems the tstsi peephole is still wrong. While working on AMS the
> following example:
>
> int test (char* x, char* y, int z)
> {
> return ((x[2] & x[3]) == 0) +
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66649
Bug ID: 66649
Summary: variable template specializations not being found
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66639
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|5.1.1 |6.0
Summary|Feature req
1 - 100 of 128 matches
Mail list logo
