https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69975
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69709
--- Comment #13 from Andreas Krebbel ---
Yes. This was problem. Your patch fixes this. Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69975
Bug ID: 69975
Summary: Missing uninitilized warning / optimized to use wrong
value
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
--disable-werror --enable-multilib
Thread model: posix
gcc version 6.0.0 20160225 (experimental) [trunk revision 233714] (GCC)
$ gcc-trunk abc.c
abc.c:1:11: error: expected '=', ',', ';', 'asm' or '__attribute__' before ')'
token
c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69953
--- Comment #4 from john.frankish at outlook dot com ---
Created attachment 37800
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37800&action=edit
preprocessed gtkmm-3.16.0/gtk/gtkmm/treeviewcolumn.cc
I'm not too sure what I'm doing here, b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69889
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Feb 26 04:53:58 2016
New Revision: 233733
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233733&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/69889
* cp-tree.h (AGGR_INIT_FROM_THUNK_P): New.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69973
Bug ID: 69973
Summary: ICE on excessive attribute vector_size
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69972
Bug ID: 69972
Summary: duplicate integer overflow diagnostic in constant
expressions
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69971
Bug ID: 69971
Summary: repetitive code with __builtin_return_address with a
large level
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69889
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49630
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gerhard.steinmetz.fortran@t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69965
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
6
--enable-checking=release --enable-languages=c,c++,lto
Thread model: posix
gcc version 6.0.0 20160225 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69969
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69709
--- Comment #12 from Richard Henderson ---
Created attachment 37799
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37799&action=edit
example patch
Or, for the purposes of combine, better like so.
This avoids creating a third (move) insn, w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69709
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68273
--- Comment #32 from Hector Oron ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #31)
> eipa_sra introduces the remaining SSA name with non-default alignment via
[PATCH]
> it would be nice to see this IL checking on trunk and thus results from
> t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69969
--- Comment #1 from Cyril Bur ---
Created attachment 37798
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37798&action=edit
minimal test case in c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69969
Bug ID: 69969
Summary: [5.3.0 Regression] Function attribute no-vsx
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69834
--- Comment #7 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #6)
Hi Dominique,
I do not know what is going on here.
> > Created attachment 37791 [details]
> > --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37791&act
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69968
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69968
Bug ID: 69968
Summary: RFC: Use Damerau-Levenshtein within spellcheck.c,
rather than Levenshtein
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69709
--- Comment #10 from Dominik Vogt ---
We've located the bug in the s390 backend. No further help is needed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69967
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Most likely this warning does not happen until all of the translation unit has
been parsed in. The variables are not marked as being used.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69962
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69666
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69967
Bug ID: 69967
Summary: #pragma GCC diagnostic ignored being ignored for
-Wunused-variable in some cases
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69966
Matthias Klose changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69966
Bug ID: 69966
Summary: libgo: Port syscall.SetsockoptUcred from golang
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: go
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66310
--- Comment #6 from Jerry DeLisle ---
When using the REPEAT intrinsic as a parameter, the frontend is simplifying
this to an actual string constant of the requested length. In this process it
is attempting to allocate length + 1 in order to inter
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69965
--- Comment #1 from Gerhard Steinmetz
---
Compiles if abstract "class(tab)" is replaced with extended "class(t)" :
$ cat z2.f90
module m
type, abstract :: tab
contains
procedure(fab), deferred :: f
end type
type, extends(tab
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69965
Bug ID: 69965
Summary: ICE: tree check: expected tree that contains ‘typed’
structure, have ‘’ in
gfc_get_character_type, at fortran/trans-types.c:1048
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69964
Bug ID: 69964
Summary: ICE on misspelled end block data, in
gfc_ascii_statement
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69963
--- Comment #1 from Gerhard Steinmetz
---
Created attachment 37795
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37795&action=edit
More tiny examples
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69963
Bug ID: 69963
Summary: ICE out of memory on displaced implicit character
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69962
Bug ID: 69962
Summary: ICE on missing parameter attribute, in
gfc_set_constant_character_len
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69960
--- Comment #4 from felix-gcc at fefe dot de ---
So which part of it is not constant, you would say?
It all looks constant to me. It only operates on constants.
If 3+4 is constant, why should this not be constant?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69903
--- Comment #6 from Patrick Palka ---
Smaller test case:
struct A {
template
static void f() { };
};
struct B : A { };
template<>
void B::f<0>() { };
int main() {
B::f<0> ();
}
If f is made non-static then the compiler rejects the sp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69960
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The C standard says it's not a constant, but clang accepts it as an extension.
That doesn't make it valid C though.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69903
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69666
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69841
James Greenhalgh changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||alan.lawrence at arm dot com,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69960
--- Comment #2 from felix-gcc at fefe dot de ---
uh, yes in C.
$ cat test.c
#define TOLOWER(x) (x&~0x20)
#define Word(s) \
s[1] ? s[2] ? s[3] ? \
(TOLOWER(s[0]) << 24) + (TOLOWER(s[1]) << 16) + (TOLOWER(s[2]) << 8) +
TOLOWER(s[3]) : \
(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69834
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Created attachment 37791
> --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37791&action=edit
> Better Patch
Withe patch applied to my working tree (many patches) fixes the PR but I see
several
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69919
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69919
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Thu Feb 25 16:57:39 2016
New Revision: 233722
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233722&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Do not gather mem stats in run_exit_handles (PR
PR middle-end/699
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67145
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #10 from Richar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69889
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69959
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69889
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> Started with r232168.
I don't think so; reverting that commit doesn't change anything.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69896
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69961
Bug ID: 69961
Summary: Segfault when calling constructor from variadic
template by referring to T::T
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.4
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69960
Bug ID: 69960
Summary: "initializer element is not constant"
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69960
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69959
--- Comment #3 from Bernd Edlinger ---
Hi Markus,
it should work now.
Please update gcc-5 to r233720 and try again.
Bernd.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69839
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69839
--- Comment #8 from Joakim Tjernlund ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #7)
> (In reply to Joakim Tjernlund from comment #6)
> > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> > > Likely a bug on the Gentoo side.
> > > The linker handles
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54687
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #12 from Manuel Ló
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61949
--- Comment #26 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #23 from Richard Biener ---
> Well, looks like same analysis as the last time ;) Sth is broken on solaris -
> please check with gdb how the stack is aligned on function e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69839
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Joakim Tjernlund from comment #6)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> > Likely a bug on the Gentoo side.
> > The linker handles differently libraries specified on the command line and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69839
--- Comment #6 from Joakim Tjernlund ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> Likely a bug on the Gentoo side.
> The linker handles differently libraries specified on the command line and
> libraries that are needed by those shared libra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69958
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69959
Bernd Edlinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot
de
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69842
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69842
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Feb 25 15:23:47 2016
New Revision: 233719
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233719&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/69842
* method.c (forward_parm): Handle parameter p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69842
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61949
--- Comment #25 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #21 from Richard Biener ---
> Ok, can reproduce but I need -msse2 in addition to -O2 (but executing ./cc1 so
> your diver may add that).
It does: config.gcc has
i[34567]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61949
--- Comment #24 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #22 from Richard Biener ---
> Btw, don't see how this can be in any way related to the cited rev.
This reghunt was straightforward, but last time I'd found that it this
t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69959
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||edlinger at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61628
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61628
--- Comment #23 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Arjen, any further results or information on this bug?
PING!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69564
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
With -Ofast -g -march=native -funroll-loops we actually (for C) beat clang on
LU.
The SOR difference is most likely IVOPTs/scheduling/RA thing, there is nothing
to actually vectorize because of the dependenc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68463
iverbin at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69785
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54687
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56981
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #13 from Domi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69959
Bug ID: 69959
Summary: [6 Regression] gcc-6 doesn't build gcc-5 anymore
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c+
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55214
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Still present on trunk (6.0) at revision r233693.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69958
Bug ID: 69958
Summary: sizeof... computes wrong size
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68049
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67364
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68049
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Feb 25 14:10:03 2016
New Revision: 233717
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233717&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/68049
* tree.c (strip_typedefs): Use DECL_ORIGINAL_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67364
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Feb 25 14:10:09 2016
New Revision: 233718
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233718&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/67364
* constexpr.c (cxx_eval_component_reference):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54687
--- Comment #11 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
What is left in this PR before closing it as FIXED?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67364
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Feb 25 14:09:24 2016
New Revision: 233716
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233716&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/67364
* constexpr.c (cxx_eval_component_reference):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68049
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Feb 25 14:09:18 2016
New Revision: 233715
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233715&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/68049
* tree.c (strip_typedefs): Use DECL_ORIGINAL_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53576
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
I get the error
Error: Can't convert TYPE(amn_t) to COMPLEX(4) at (1)
if I replace amn%nsites in
do jj = 1, amn%nsites
with a constant value (tested 0 and 5).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61949
--- Comment #23 from Richard Biener ---
Well, looks like same analysis as the last time ;) Sth is broken on solaris -
please check with gdb how the stack is aligned on function entry.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61949
--- Comment #22 from Richard Biener ---
Btw, don't see how this can be in any way related to the cited rev.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61949
--- Comment #21 from Richard Biener ---
Ok, can reproduce but I need -msse2 in addition to -O2 (but executing ./cc1 so
your diver may add that).
That's memcpy expanded as
uint128_t _36;
...
_36 = MEM[(char * {ref-all})&buffer];
MEM[(char
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69953
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
Hello.
I've just tried to build latest inkscape (gparted) with latest GCC, and no
problem seen for following configurations:
inkscape:
-Os -flto=9
-flto -fuse-linker-plugin -mtune=generic -Os -pipe
gparted:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60144
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot
eth
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38303
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69589
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |hubicka at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69955
--- Comment #4 from mrestelli ---
My problem also shows up at runtime, compilation is fine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69785
--- Comment #7 from Matthias Klose ---
Created attachment 37793
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37793&action=edit
preprocessed source
both symbols are defined in
https://sources.debian.net/src/libecap/1.0.1-3/src/libecap/com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61949
--- Comment #20 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #17 from Richard Biener ---
> ./configure --target=i386-pc-solaris2.10
>
> is not enough, with -O3 -msse2 and the preprocessed file I get
>
> md5_finish_ctx:
> ...
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69589
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69785
--- Comment #6 from Matthias Klose ---
this one can be demangled:
_ZN9__gnu_cxx13new_allocatorISt10_List_nodeISt4pairINSt7__cxx1112basic_stringIcSt11char_traitsIcESaIcEEENSt3tr18weak_ptrIN7libecap7adapter7ServiceEE9constructISG_JRKSF_EEEvPT_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69955
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Compile time or runtime? (Can't test right now).
My check was for run time: running the test grabs my 16Gb of memory.
My guess is that the temporary for
write(*,*) size( (/( var(i)%ts , i=1,si
1 - 100 of 160 matches
Mail list logo
