https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70529
--- Comment #2 from Axel Naumann ---
Hi Jakub,
Thanks for your reply!
Let me try to explain better then.
This code
auto a = 0x123p2;
auto b = 0x123p-2;
compiles just fine until the recent hexfloat change. Now, the second line will
trigger an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70537
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70510
--- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Kirill Yukhin from comment #1)
> will take a look.
I have patch in testing:
-- cut here--
diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/sse.md b/gcc/config/i386/sse.md
index 5fd650f..16ec696 100644
--- a/gcc/conf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14505
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Talking about clang, it gets it wrong, returns 0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70540
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
commit f153f0531fbf0c8a5454ba6662b8819a6831bea6
Author: jason
Date: Sun Mar 17 02:41:22 2013 +
PR c++/54277
* cp-tree.h (WILDCARD_TYPE_P): Split out from...
(MAYBE_CLASS_TYPE_P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14505
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70540
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70540
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|6.0 |4.9.4
Summary|[6 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70540
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70541
Bug ID: 70541
Summary: unnoticed invalid dereference when using address
sanitizer
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
++,lto
--prefix=/usr/local/gcc-trunk --disable-bootstrap
Thread model: posix
gcc version 6.0.0 20160404 (experimental) [trunk revision 234712] (GCC)
$
$ g++-5.3 -c small.cpp
small.cpp: In function ‘void foo()’:
small.cpp:4:8: error: ‘f’ does not name a type
auto f = [&] { retu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70538
--- Comment #2 from jim at meyering dot net ---
Small correction:
It's not "while attempting to emit...", but rather "after emitting that
warning".
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70538
--- Comment #1 from jim at meyering dot net ---
FYI, that same ICE strikes also with gcc-4.9.3, gcc-5.1.0 and gcc-5.3.0 when
using -std=c++11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70538
Bug ID: 70538
Summary: deprecated "access declaration" evokes gcc_unreachable
ICE
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70537
Bug ID: 70537
Summary: ICE segfault compiling jar with gcj
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: driver
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70452
--- Comment #9 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Tue Apr 5 01:20:00 2016
New Revision: 234732
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234732&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Remove class cache_map and use ggc hash_maps instead (PR c++/70452)
gcc/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14505
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70117
--- Comment #14 from Alan Modra ---
> if (fmt == &ibm_extended_double)
No, there is mips_extended_format too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14505
Alex Rosenberg changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|ASSIGNED
Resolution|WONTFIX
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70536
Ed Catmur changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ed at catmur dot co.uk
--- Comment #1 from E
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70536
Bug ID: 70536
Summary: g++ doesn't emit DW_AT_name for
DW_TAG_GNU_formal_parameter_pack
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67172
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67172
--- Comment #9 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Mon Apr 4 22:29:02 2016
New Revision: 234727
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234727&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/67172
* libgcc2.c (L__main): Undefine __LIBG
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67172
--- Comment #10 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Mon Apr 4 22:29:45 2016
New Revision: 234728
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234728&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/67172
* libgcc2.c (L__main): Undefine __LIB
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58062
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|wrong-code |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54367
Bug 54367 depends on bug 58062, which changed state.
Bug 58062 Summary: [C++11] bogus __func__ lookup in lambda body
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58062
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70359
--- Comment #15 from Fredrik Hederstierna
---
Created attachment 38185
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38185&action=edit
tok.c
I took another example for CSiBE and stripped it down. I'm not 100% sure it is
the exact same is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30971
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14505
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70461
Alexander Fomin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #38134|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004
Bug 55004 depends on bug 66460, which changed state.
Bug 66460 Summary: ICE using __func__ in constexpr function.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66460
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70353
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||redi at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #20 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66460
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70532
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70353
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vincent.picaud at laposte dot
net
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70535
Bug ID: 70535
Summary: broken nested reductions in openacc parallel regions
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: openacc
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70534
Bug ID: 70534
Summary: openacc parallel reductions aren't neutered
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70534
cesar at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||openacc
Status|UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70512
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
(In reply to Nathan Sidwell from comment #3)
> Are you working on that? If so, please reassign this bug.
I'm not currently. But I think the approach you outlines makes sense; I just
didn't get round to wri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70512
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I'd note that we likely need to modify them in-place, as PARM_DECLs etc. with
those types already will be around.
for (t = TYPE_POINTER_TO (to_type); t; t = TYPE_NEXT_PTR_TO (t))
and
for (t = TYPE_REFERENCE_T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70512
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70533
Bug ID: 70533
Summary: reductions on reference-typed variables are broken in
OpenACC
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: openacc
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70357
cesar at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70512
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70018
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70307
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Apr 4 17:20:53 2016
New Revision: 234723
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234723&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/70307
* gcc.dg/torture/pr70307.c: Add -Wno-p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70532
Bug ID: 70532
Summary: An "constexpr + variable template" example that gives
an "internal compiler error"
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70373
cesar at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cesar at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70379
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||craie at acm dot org
--- Comment #3 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70176
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70173
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Mon Apr 4 16:37:58 2016
New Revision: 234721
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234721&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gnattools: Clean config.cache (PR70173)
The config.cache file shoul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70529
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70379
Andre Vieira changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66223
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[5/6 Regression] Diagnostic |[5 Regression] Diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66223
--- Comment #14 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Mon Apr 4 15:54:39 2016
New Revision: 234719
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234719&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/66223
* ipa-devirt.c (maybe_record_node): Do not o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70528
--- Comment #10 from Ville Voutilainen ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #8)
> I don't know how to implement is_default_constructible without using that
> decltype, or something similar that will cause the same problem.
>
> If we had
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70457
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70457
--- Comment #15 from Bill Schmidt ---
Matthias, the code is now fixed everywhere upstream. Do you need a merge into
ibm/gcc-5-branch?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70457
--- Comment #14 from Bill Schmidt ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Mon Apr 4 15:47:51 2016
New Revision: 234718
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234718&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2016-04-04 Bill Schmidt
Jakub Jelinek
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70457
--- Comment #13 from Bill Schmidt ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Mon Apr 4 15:45:59 2016
New Revision: 234717
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234717&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2016-04-04 Bill Schmidt
Jakub Jelinek
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70457
--- Comment #12 from Bill Schmidt ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Mon Apr 4 15:42:19 2016
New Revision: 234716
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234716&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2016-04-04 Bill Schmidt
Jakub Jelinek
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70528
--- Comment #9 from Patrick Palka ---
Here's something strange.
gcc rejects and clang accepts the following test case, but if decltype (A()) is
replaced by decltype (T()) then gcc accepts and clang rejects it.
template
struct H
{
template
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70499
--- Comment #6 from Matthias Hochsteger ---
Oh, now I get it, sorry for the misunderstanding.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70499
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I haven't been talking on what you should be using in your project, but rather
what testcase we want to include in GCC sources. And there the immintrin.h
dependency IMHO is unnecessary etc.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70528
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I don't know how to implement is_default_constructible without using that
decltype, or something similar that will cause the same problem.
If we had a __is_constructible(_Tp, _Args...) builtin we could use
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70507
--- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor ---
Thank you for the suggestion.
Storing values via pointers is not C++ 14 specific so the answer to your
question is that having the builtins be treated as constexpr would be useful in
both C++ 11 and C++ 14 mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70499
--- Comment #4 from Matthias Hochsteger ---
This testcase is just a very striped-down version of the actual code to
reproduce the error, so it may seem useless at some spots, like the missing
initialization.
We already have a workaround by adding
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70516
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70528
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Yeah, and it rejects both #c1 and #c5 and the variants with K() = default;
So, unlike PR58328 here both compilers agree, and the disagreement is just
whether it is ok for libstdc++ to use the decltype?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70499
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The function needs to deal with cases where e.g. DECL_VALUE_EXPR is added to
various VAR_DECLs and the IL needs to be updated accordingtly. It is mostly
used by OpenMP lowering, and that is done not in SSA f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70528
--- Comment #6 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #5)
> If comment #1 should be accepted, then should this be accepted too?
>
> template
> struct I {
> };
>
> struct J {
> struct K {
> int First = J::N;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70528
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70437
--- Comment #2 from Ville Voutilainen ---
Created attachment 38179
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38179&action=edit
First stab at a patch
Initial patch done, testsuite additions to follow, will submit once
compile-farm test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70437
Ville Voutilainen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70117
--- Comment #13 from Michael Meissner ---
In gcc/builtins.c it is probably better to use:
const struct real_format *fmt = FLOAT_MODE_FORMAT (mode);
if (fmt == &ibm_extended_double)
{
// ...
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70117
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70531
James Greenhalgh changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68953
--- Comment #4 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 38178
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38178&action=edit
UDIFF
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70526
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
This changed with r223126.
The *.optimized dump is the same between r223124 and r223126, but already there
we can see that SRA used the TypedOrValueRegister type for the read:
MEM[(struct &)&D.2403] ={v} {
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68953
--- Comment #3 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
A way to look at the problem is to compare against the dump info for the
variant without the extra (redundant) dimension.
So, compare dump-info for -DEXTRADIM={0,1} for this source:
...
#if EXTRADI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70526
--- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Started with r223126. Richi?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68881
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70525
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70527
--- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to amker from comment #0)
> Seems "(long int) x * 12 - (long int)(x + 1) * 12" is missed in
> generic-simplify.
Interestingly, we manage just fine if 12 is replaced with a variable. The issue
seems t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70530
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |SUSPENDED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62254
--- Comment #19 from Nick Clifton ---
(In reply to Julien Margetts from comment #17)
> The following test case still fails with the patch applied (originally bug
> 70362)
>
> arm-none-eabi-gcc -march=armv3m -c -o c_compat_x_tst.o
> gcc/testsuite
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70526
--- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #1)
> -Wstrict-aliasing=2 warns:
>
> markus@x4 tmp % g++ -O2 -Wstrict-aliasing=2 test_fire.cpp
> test_fire.cpp: In instantiation of ‘const T* AlignedStorage2::addr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70362
--- Comment #8 from Nick Clifton ---
(In reply to Ramana Radhakrishnan from comment #6)
> Fails at O0 in this case, I cannot type. I still think this is a tail from
> PR62254 and that should just be reopened.
I cannot reproduce this failure. I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70528
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70528
--- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #2)
> Seems related to PR 58328
Hmm, does it makes sense to compute exception specifications even with
-fno-exceptions (LLVM default build flag)?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53220
--- Comment #22 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The added diagnostic rejects this, which clang and EDG accept:
extern "C" int printf(const char*, ...);
int main() {
using A = int[1];
printf("%p\n", A{1} );
}
ts.c:4:18: error: taking address of te
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70531
Bug ID: 70531
Summary: Turning optimisation level 2 causes the output program
to go into infinite loop
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70527
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70528
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Seems related to PR 58328
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70336
--- Comment #10 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #8)
> Here -Wconversion will warn for many casesm even in 4.9, eventhough one
> could argue that say in the f4 case nothing is lost during conversion, or
There
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70528
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70433
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #2 from vrie
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70528
--- Comment #1 from Ville Voutilainen ---
A shorter reproducer for the funny part where the error arises:
template
struct I {
};
struct J {
struct K {
int First = 0;
};
I FunctionMDInfo;
};
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70526
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70530
Bug ID: 70530
Summary: You should probably add addressof (a) != addressof (b)
check to std::swap
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
1 - 100 of 160 matches
Mail list logo
