https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67436
--- Comment #3 from Johannes S. Mueller-Roemer ---
The following workaround seems to work as well:
int main(int, char**)
{
thread_local int foo;
[&foo=foo] (auto bar) {
foo += bar;
}(1u);
return 0;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61578
--- Comment #23 from Fredrik Hederstierna
---
Thanks for your patch, I tried it out, and it solves the small example fine,
the code now is similar to GCC 4.8 for this particular example.
Though when I ran the full CSiBE benchmark, the code size
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67438
Mikhail Maltsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||miyuki at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65804
Chen Gang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gang.chen.5i5j at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66620
Chen Gang changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67435
--- Comment #6 from Yann Collet ---
The issue seems in fact related to _instruction alignment_.
More precisely, to alignment of some critical loop.
That's basically why adding some code in the file would just "pushes" some
other code into anothe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67441
Bug ID: 67441
Summary: Scheduler unable to disambiguate memory references in
unrolled loop
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67440
--- Comment #1 from Doug Evans ---
Created attachment 36288
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36288&action=edit
patch + testcase
This could use another set of eyes.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67440
Bug ID: 67440
Summary: pretty-printing of a const set fails
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60586
--- Comment #2 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Wed Sep 2 23:59:21 2015
New Revision: 227423
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227423&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix spawned function with lambda function
Make sure that the spawn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53852
--- Comment #19 from Sebastian Pop ---
Patch fixing the compile time problem with at least isl-0.15:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-09/msg00198.html
isl-0.12 does not support the compute-out mechanism.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65913
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Richard's patch in comment 2 doesn't seem to help, the testcase with
std::atomic::is_lock_free() still fails to link, as does the simplest
case, std::atomic::is_lock_free()
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67430
Harald Anlauf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gmx dot de
--- Comment #3 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67415
--- Comment #5 from Richard Earnshaw ---
Your GCC-4.9 is a Linaro build which contains some extensions of their own.
It's possible that they've made some changes in the way search paths work. I'd
start by asking them.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67432
--- Comment #4 from Chengnian Sun ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #3)
> Done.
This is very fast. Thanks, Marek.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67432
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67432
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Wed Sep 2 21:00:38 2015
New Revision: 227421
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227421&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/67432
* c-parser.c (c_parser_enum_specifier): Give
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67279
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67430
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Baldwin ---
In 7.2.1.4 of my copy of the standard it states:
"A subroutine defines the defined assignment x1 = x2 if"
...
"(5) either
(a) the ranks of x1 and x2 match those of d1 and d2 or
(b) the subroutine
-checking
Thread model: posix
gcc version 6.0.0 20150902 (experimental) [trunk revision 227416] (GCC)
$ ./xgcc -B. ../../gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/arm-fp16-compile-assign.c -O0
-mfp16-format=ieee -S-o arm-fp16-compile-assign.s -O2 -march=armv7-a
-mrestrict-it
rmansfield@BB1543999644:~/gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67429
--- Comment #15 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Paul Thomas from comment #14)
> Do you want to commit or would you like me to do it?
Please do, I'll have little time for gcc in the next weeks. Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62097
--- Comment #8 from Joel Sherrill ---
(In reply to rsand...@gcc.gnu.org from comment #7)
> AIUI usual practice is not to assign stuff to people
> without asking them first, otherwise it gives the
> impression that someone is actively working on i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67429
--- Comment #14 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #13)
> The patch in comment 9 restores the old (correct?) behavior without
> regression.
Indeed and it gets rid of the problems that I have been encountering.
M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67438
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|i686|i?86-*-*
Summary|[6 Regressio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67438
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
THis just looks like increased register pressure. Maybe some :s should be used
in match.pd or maybe not.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67437
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
See https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11393#c28 .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67438
Alexander Fomin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||afomin.mailbox at gmail dot com
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67438
Bug ID: 67438
Summary: [6 Regression] ~X op ~Y pattern relocation causes loop
performance degradation
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67437
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
-fpremissive might allow this code though.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67437
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67437
Bug ID: 67437
Summary: [5/6 Regression] Template can't use const value of
explicitly instantiated instance in a const expression
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.1
Status: UNCON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67415
--- Comment #4 from Bernhard Rosenkränzer ---
Relevant parameters are the same.
Also, gcc-5.2/bin/arm-linux-androideabi-gcc -latomic does find libatomic -- so
probably print-file-name=libatomic.a should reflect that...
$ gcc-5.2/bin/arm-linux-an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65932
--- Comment #20 from Jim Wilson ---
*** Bug 66271 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66271
Jim Wilson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #9 from Jim Wilson -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67414
Janne Blomqvist changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67414
--- Comment #4 from Janne Blomqvist ---
Author: jb
Date: Wed Sep 2 15:13:35 2015
New Revision: 227406
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227406&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR 67414 Handle newlocale failure
2015-09-02 Janne Blomqvist
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67317
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67317
--- Comment #8 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Wed Sep 2 15:06:56 2015
New Revision: 227405
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227405&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline:
2015-08-27 Uros Bizjak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67414
--- Comment #3 from Janne Blomqvist ---
Author: jb
Date: Wed Sep 2 14:51:40 2015
New Revision: 227404
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227404&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR 67414 Better diagnostics on backtrace failure, gf_strerror bugfix
2015-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67435
--- Comment #5 from Yann Collet ---
Complementary information :
-Winline : does not output anything (is that normal ?)
-fdump-ipa-inline : produce several large files, the interesting one being 1.5
MB long. That's a huge dump to analyze.
Nonet
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67436
--- Comment #2 from Johannes S. Mueller-Roemer ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> (In reply to Johannes S. Mueller-Roemer from comment #0)
> > I encountered an error with a missing __tls_init after using a thread_local
> > variab
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67432
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62097
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org|unassigned at gcc do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67435
--- Comment #4 from Yann Collet ---
> Gcc also tries to limit code growth for the unit also which might be
> something you are seeing.
Yes, that could be the case.
Is there some information available somewhere on such unit-level limit ?
Specif
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67436
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Status|U
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62097
--- Comment #6 from Joel Sherrill ---
git blame pins us down a bit on the change:
4b366ca9 (rsandifo 2014-02-07 07:46:34 + 74) hardfp_defines_for = \
4b366ca9 (rsandifo 2014-02-07 07:46:34 + 75) $(shell echo $1 | \
4b366ca9 (rsandifo 2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67436
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|critical|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67435
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Gcc also tries to limit code growth for the unit also which might be something
you are seeing. You can also try -Winline. Also -flto is becoming more
prevalent and more popular. So you might want to give that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61337
--- Comment #4 from graham.stott at btinternet dot com ---
Original message From: "vladimir.fuka at gmail
dot com" Date:02/09/2015 14:55
(GMT+00:00) To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug
fortran/61337] Wrong indexing and runti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63653
Christophe Lyon changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62097
--- Comment #5 from Joel Sherrill ---
MIPS tools for RTEMS are unbuildable on *BSD due to this GNU sed dependency.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63652
Christophe Lyon changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59810
--- Comment #1 from Christophe Lyon ---
Author: clyon
Date: Wed Sep 2 14:04:22 2015
New Revision: 227402
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227402&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[AArch64_be] Fix vldX/vstX AdvSIMD intrinsics.
2015-09-02 Christophe L
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63652
--- Comment #3 from Christophe Lyon ---
Author: clyon
Date: Wed Sep 2 14:04:22 2015
New Revision: 227402
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227402&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[AArch64_be] Fix vldX/vstX AdvSIMD intrinsics.
2015-09-02 Christophe L
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63653
--- Comment #2 from Christophe Lyon ---
Author: clyon
Date: Wed Sep 2 14:04:22 2015
New Revision: 227402
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227402&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[AArch64_be] Fix vldX/vstX AdvSIMD intrinsics.
2015-09-02 Christophe L
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67435
--- Comment #2 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
And you can use -fdump-ipa-inline to look at gcc's inline decisions in detail.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61337
--- Comment #3 from Vladimir Fuka ---
The crash is at line 22:
allocate(a(size(tmp)+1)%items(size(e)), source = e)
ASAN:SIGSEGV
=
==5902==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: SEGV on unknown a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67435
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67436
Bug ID: 67436
Summary: [C++14] Generic lambda capture fails for thread_local
variables
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: critical
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67435
Bug ID: 67435
Summary: Large performance drop on apparently unrelated changes
(probable cause : strange inlining side-effect)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.4
Status: UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58233
--- Comment #4 from Vittorio Zecca ---
Still there on 5.2.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50402
--- Comment #2 from Vittorio Zecca ---
! gfortran ICE in gfc_conv_expr_descriptor at fortran/trans-array.c
interface
function f()
pointer f
end
end interface
type t
real,pointer :: p(:)
end type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50541
--- Comment #5 from Vittorio Zecca ---
Bug still there in 5.2.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50410
--- Comment #19 from Vittorio Zecca ---
ICE still there in 5.2.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67424
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
That allows the bootstrap to complete, but all the cilk+ tests fail:
/home/jwakely/gcc/5/x86_64-unknown-netbsd5.1/bin/ld: ./reduction-3.exe: hidden
symbol `__cpu_model' in
/home/jwakely/build/gcc/testsuite
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50406
--- Comment #2 from Vittorio Zecca ---
! gfortran produces weird ld message undefined reference to `___MOD_str'
module m
contains
function fun(i)
character(2), PARAMETER:: str(1) = (/'SD'/)
character(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64456
Christophe Lyon changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63653
--- Comment #1 from Christophe Lyon ---
vldX pass since r219958.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67434
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67434
Bug ID: 67434
Summary: std::chrono::duration acts like static even if
instantiated every time
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37475
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Issue 382 is NAD
http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-defects.html#2369
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60271
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|SUSPENDED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67433
--- Comment #12 from xuejuncao ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #11)
> (In reply to xuejuncao from comment #10)
> > when bool value read from unpacked stream or file, wen can not ensure it's 1
> > or 0;
> > so maybe the best solution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67408
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67408
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Sep 2 10:51:14 2015
New Revision: 227400
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227400&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-09-02 Sebastian Huber
PR libstdc++/67408
* incl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67408
--- Comment #9 from Sebastian Huber ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #8)
> There's no need to test on linux, I can do that myself. If it works on your
> non-pthreads target I'll commit your patch.
Here it works fine:
https://lists.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67429
--- Comment #13 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
The patch in comment 9 restores the old (correct?) behavior without regression.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67421
--- Comment #1 from Jiong Wang ---
(In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #0)
> Created attachment 36275 [details]
> wide-shift-64.c.219r.combine
>
> The new gcc.dg/wide-shift-64.c testcase FAILs on SPARC for the 64-bit
> multilib
> only:
>
> FA
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67433
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to xuejuncao from comment #10)
> when bool value read from unpacked stream or file, wen can not ensure it's 1
> or 0;
> so maybe the best solution is compile with "-D_Bool=char" for now :-/
You c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67408
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
There's no need to test on linux, I can do that myself. If it works on your
non-pthreads target I'll commit your patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67433
--- Comment #10 from xuejuncao ---
when bool value read from unpacked stream or file, wen can not ensure it's 1 or
0;
so maybe the best solution is compile with "-D_Bool=char" for now :-/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61337
--- Comment #2 from Vladimir Fuka ---
The first is fixed on trunk apparently by
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2015-07/msg00038.html
The modification
call add_item(a_list, [1, 2])
call add_item(a_list, [1, 2])
do i = 1, size(a_list)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58043
Vladimir Fuka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vladimir.fuka at gmail dot com
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67424
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Created attachment 36286
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36286&action=edit
support netbsd in libcilkrts/runtime/os-unix.c
I'm testing this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67424
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-unknown-netbsd*
Sta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67405
Ilya Enkovich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67410
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66705
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67428
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66705
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67428
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|i386,avr|i386, avr, x86_64
Status|UN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67433
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67429
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67429
--- Comment #12 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> > Created attachment 36283 [details]
> > Patch for PR65045 that displays the problem
>
> Paul,
>
> Your patch for gcc/fortran/decl.c does not apply on trunk:
>
> if (state == COMP_BLOCK)
>
> is now
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67433
--- Comment #8 from xuejuncao ---
thanks, i get the below result with -fsanitize=undefined
boolmagic.c:12:16: runtime error: load of value 255, which is not a valid value
for type '_Bool'
boolmagic.c:13:15: runtime error: load of value 255, whi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67429
--- Comment #11 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #10)
> > Error: Expecting END BLOCK statement at (1)
> > (null):0: confused by earlier errors, bailing out
>
>
> Even if *I* cannot reproduce this, such
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67430
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67431
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67408
--- Comment #7 from Sebastian Huber ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #6)
> (In reply to Sebastian Huber from comment #4)
> > Sorry, I should have linked my patch:
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-09/msg00028.html
>
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67433
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
I should say the value that is stored in the bool variable can only be 0 or 1;
anything else is undefined bahavior.
1 - 100 of 108 matches
Mail list logo
