https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78672
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Created attachment 40273
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40273&action=edit
Results with Andre's patch
> But from your description I could fix (1) and (2) by looking at the code.
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78696
--- Comment #13 from Martin Sebor ---
Created attachment 40272
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40272&action=edit
Lightly tested patch.
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #6)
After some more testing, although the patch I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78703
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71727
hs.naveen2u at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hs.naveen2u at gmail dot co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78705
--- Comment #8 from Steve Kargl ---
On Wed, Dec 07, 2016 at 01:31:51AM +, dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> --- Comment #7 from David Malcolm ---
> Sorry about the breakage. Should be fixed by r243332.
>
Thanks for the prompt attent
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78633
--- Comment #12 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
Hmm... From
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint/Sharing.html#Sharing
the above patch looks wrong. Perhaps the splitter in problem
might have to take care of subreg case even when referencing
a reg rtx
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78705
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78705
--- Comment #6 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Wed Dec 7 01:28:13 2016
New Revision: 243332
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243332&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix x86_64-ism in selftest (PR bootstrap/78705)
In r243317 I accidenta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78705
--- Comment #5 from David Malcolm ---
i386.md's define_expand "memory_blockage" has:
operands[0] = gen_rtx_MEM (BLKmode, gen_rtx_SCRATCH (Pmode));
so it's due to the difference in Pmode between i386 and x86_64.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78646
--- Comment #11 from Bill Schmidt ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Wed Dec 7 01:08:40 2016
New Revision: 243331
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243331&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-12-06 Bill Schmidt
Backport from mainline
2016
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78646
--- Comment #10 from Bill Schmidt ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Wed Dec 7 01:04:47 2016
New Revision: 243330
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243330&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-12-06 Bill Schmidt
Backport from mainline
2016
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78705
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78633
--- Comment #11 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
Created attachment 40271
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40271&action=edit
reduce testcase
With -O1, sh4-linux compiler makes insns
(insn 67 150 165 5 (set (reg:SI 239)
(and:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78705
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
Sorry about the breakage.
Expected:
(cinsn 1 (set (mem/v:BLK (0|scratch:DI) [0 A8])
(unspec:BLK [
(mem/v:BLK (reuse_rtx 0) [0 A8])
] UNSPEC_MEMORY_BLOCKAGE)))
Actual:
(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72717
--- Comment #3 from Michael Meissner ---
Created attachment 40270
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40270&action=edit
Proposed patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78705
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78705
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
svn merge -r 243317:243316 .
fixes the problem.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78705
--- Comment #1 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to kargl from comment #0)
> gmake[3]: Entering directory '/mnt/kargl/obj/gcc'
> /mnt/kargl/obj/./gcc/xgcc -B/mnt/kargl/obj/./gcc/ -nostdinc -x c /dev/null
> -S -fself-test -o /dev/null
> /
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78696
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #12 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78705
Bug ID: 78705
Summary: ICE in ix86_test_dumping_memory_blockage
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: blocker
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67955
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67955
--- Comment #9 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Tue Dec 6 23:18:17 2016
New Revision: 243325
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243325&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/67955
* tree-ssa-alias.c (same_addr_si
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55389
--- Comment #5 from Eric Botcazou ---
*** Bug 52197 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52197
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55389
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou ---
This happens for libsanitizer, libcilkrts, libitm at least.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78700
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78700
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Tue Dec 6 22:47:00 2016
New Revision: 243322
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243322&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/78700
* calls.c (expand_call): Move back
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72717
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78658
--- Comment #2 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Tue Dec 6 22:15:31 2016
New Revision: 243320
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243320&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2016-12-06 Michael Meissner
PR target/78658
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72827
--- Comment #29 from Bill Schmidt ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Tue Dec 6 22:11:54 2016
New Revision: 243319
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243319&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-12-06 Bill Schmidt
Backport from mainline
2016
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78626
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to Bernd Schmidt from comment #3)
> Not sure it's that bad really. An unconditional trap is pretty much by
> definition not performance-critical.
Sure, but this was prohibiting propagating any
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78655
--- Comment #4 from Ivan Sorokin ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> + if (flag_delete_null_pointer_checks
> + && is_gimple_assign (stmt)
> + && is_gimple_assign (stmt)
Duplicate conjunct.
> + && gimple_assign_rh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78698
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78626
--- Comment #4 from Bernd Schmidt ---
Created attachment 40269
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40269&action=edit
Candidate patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78626
--- Comment #3 from Bernd Schmidt ---
Not sure it's that bad really. An unconditional trap is pretty much by
definition not performance-critical. Then again, there's a possible alternate
fix, which I'll attach.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78703
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78696
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to jos...@codesourcery.com from comment #9)
> Implementation-specific can in practice include cases where the
> implementation deviates from the standard (e.g. Windows 3-digit exponents,
> though
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78696
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78680
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78626
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool ---
I have tested something similar, and it does work, but it prevents any
optimisation by cprop of any trap_if, also if it would not turn into
an unconditional trap. This is pretty bad :-(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78655
--- Comment #3 from Ivan Sorokin ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> Of course I wonder why the check is here in the first place... Is placement
> new valid for nullptr?
I believe this check here is to allow placement new (std::
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78658
--- Comment #1 from Michael Meissner ---
Created attachment 40268
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40268&action=edit
Proposed patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78561
--- Comment #17 from Segher Boessenkool ---
(In reply to James Greenhalgh from comment #16)
> Created attachment 40267 [details]
> Proposed Patch
>
> Would you mind testing the attached to see if it fixes your issue?
Bootstrapped fine, regressi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78704
Bug ID: 78704
Summary: operator-> pointer return type is not recognized as
pointer type
Product: gcc
Version: 6.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78655
--- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse ---
See also PR 35878.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78626
Bernd Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernds at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78657
--- Comment #5 from Joseph Quinsey ---
More similar or duplicate reports:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63612
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43027
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37267
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78702
--- Comment #3 from AK ---
llvm-project/install/bin/clang++ -std=gnu++14 -D_GLIBCXX_SHARED
-fno-implicit-templates -Wall -Wextra -Wwrite-strings -Wcast-qual -Wabi
-fdiagnostics-show-location=once -ffunction-sections -fdata-sections
-frandom-seed=
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78702
--- Comment #2 from AK ---
Sorry for the confusion, I was using clang++ (trunk) to build libstdc++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78657
Joseph Quinsey changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78657
--- Comment #3 from Joseph Quinsey ---
Similar or duplicate reports:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70811,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63326,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60875,
https://gcc.gnu.org/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78551
--- Comment #10 from Vlad Petric ---
Could someone boost its priority? Given that gcc segfaults with valid code (see
newest example/attachment), I believe it's worth a P1.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78696
--- Comment #9 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
Implementation-specific can in practice include cases where the
implementation deviates from the standard (e.g. Windows 3-digit exponents,
though disabling the optimization for floating-poi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78695
--- Comment #6 from Bill Schmidt ---
Still no repro with bootstrap compiler.
wschmidt@genoa:~/src$ $GCC_INSTALL/bin/gcc -S -O3 pr78695.c
wschmidt@genoa:~/src$ $GCC_INSTALL/bin/gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=/home/wschmidt/gcc/install/g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71274
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Dec 6 18:51:56 2016
New Revision: 243314
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243314&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71274 - deprecated warning without use.
* decl2.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71515
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Dec 6 18:51:50 2016
New Revision: 243313
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243313&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71515 - typename in partial specialization
* pt.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77907
--- Comment #9 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Dec 6 18:51:45 2016
New Revision: 243312
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243312&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/77907 - static init and PMF
* constexpr.c (cxx_eva
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57728
--- Comment #12 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Dec 6 18:51:37 2016
New Revision: 243311
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243311&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/57728 - explicit instantiation and defaulted functions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72717
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70864
--- Comment #4 from Gerhard Steinmetz
---
Related to pr68846 (technically slightly different).
Backtrace identical to that of pr68846 comment 3 etc.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68846
--- Comment #5 from Gerhard Steinmetz
---
Related to pr70864 (technically slightly different).
Backtrace identical to that of pr70864 comment 3.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68846
--- Comment #4 from Gerhard Steinmetz
---
Further modified and reduced to a skeleton, i.e. :
$ cat z3.f90
module m68846
type t
contains
procedure, nopass :: f => f1
end type
contains
function f1() result(p)
real, point
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68846
--- Comment #3 from Gerhard Steinmetz
---
Both variants reduced and simplified a bit :
$ cat z1.f90
module m68846
type grid_t
real, pointer :: p(:) => null()
end type
type subgrid_t
class(grid_t), pointer :: grd => null()
cont
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68846
Gerhard Steinmetz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gerhard.steinmetz.fortran@t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72755
--- Comment #10 from Gerhard Steinmetz
---
Reduced source is nearly identical, backtrace completely identical
to that of pr70864 comment 3.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78696
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78703
Bug ID: 78703
Summary: -fprintf-return-value floating point handling
incorrect in locales with a mulltibyte decimal point
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70864
Gerhard Steinmetz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gerhard.steinmetz.fortran@t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72755
Gerhard Steinmetz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gerhard.steinmetz.fortran@t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78696
--- Comment #7 from James Greenhalgh ---
That fixes my miscompilation, and the miscompilation of the library I reduced
the testcase from. Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78700
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|go |middle-end
--- Comment #3 from Eric Botc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78700
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
URL|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78700
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78701
--- Comment #3 from Vincent ---
I am compiling with:
g++ test_bug.cpp -o test_bug
g++ -std=c++11 test_bug.cpp -o test_bug
g++ -std=c++14 test_bug.cpp -o test_bug
and it fails in the 3 cases.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78693
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78561
--- Comment #16 from James Greenhalgh ---
Created attachment 40267
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40267&action=edit
Proposed Patch
Would you mind testing the attached to see if it fixes your issue?
I've bootstrapped it on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78701
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78631
--- Comment #9 from Ilya Enkovich ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #8)
>
> MPX wrapper library doesn't call external functions with bounds
> and there is no need to use PLT to call internal functions within
> MPX wrapper library.
It doesn'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78702
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to AK from comment #0)
> In file: include/bits/locale_classes.h
> 371 class locale::facet
> 372 {
> ...
> 465 class __shim;
> 466
> 467 const facet* _M_sso_shim(const id*) const;
> 468
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78696
--- Comment #6 from Martin Sebor ---
The bug behind the wrong output in comment #0 is in the format_floating
function with an unknown argument failing to use the precision. The following
simple patch fixes that.
@@ -1261,9 +1277,9 @@ format_flo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78695
--- Comment #5 from Bill Schmidt ---
Also does not reproduce with a debug compiler at r243219:
wschmidt@genoa:~/src$ $GCC_INSTALL/bin/gcc -S -O3 pr78695.c
wschmidt@genoa:~/src$ $GCC_INSTALL/bin/gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=/home/wsch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78702
Bug ID: 78702
Summary: [libstdc++] class __shim in locale::facet is private
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78701
--- Comment #1 from Vincent ---
Addition:
==
#include
template T f(T x) {return T();}
int main(int argc, char* argv[]) {return f(42);}
=
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78701
Bug ID: 78701
Summary: Template deduction, dependent template and conversion
to bool failure
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78672
vehre at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78672
vehre at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78672
--- Comment #1 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 40266
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40266&action=edit
Patch fixing (1) and (2) of the list in the description.
Hi Dominique,
I have not (yet) been able to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78696
--- Comment #5 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
The radix character is not a POSIX extension. See the C11 7.1.1#2: "The
decimal-point character is the character used by functions that convert
floating-point numbers to or from character
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78659
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78700
Bug ID: 78700
Summary: gccgo testcases stack.go, recover.go, crypto/tls start
failing with r241222
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78680
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor ---
The failed assertion in get_substring_ranges_for_loc:
gcc_assert (line_width >= (start.column - 1 + literal_length));
suggests that the code assumes the entire literal is on the same line (i.e.,
contains n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78657
--- Comment #2 from Joseph Quinsey ---
The code
int foo =
#pragma GCC diagnostic push
42;
gives exactly the same error messages. So this report is not about _Pragma per
se, but about #pragma.
But I cannot see where or if the standard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78659
--- Comment #6 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Tue Dec 6 17:13:31 2016
New Revision: 243308
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243308&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-12-06 Jerry DeLisle
PR fortran/78659
* resolv
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78695
--- Comment #4 from Bill Schmidt ---
The offending line appears to be
rtx_insn *and_insn = DF_REF_INSN (base_def_link->ref);
which would seem to indicate an inconsistency in the dataflow information at
this point. It would be good to be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78695
--- Comment #3 from Bill Schmidt ---
Yeah, I can't reproduce this either (r243264). Do you have local
modifications?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78695
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78690
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78226
vehre at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78699
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64081
Bernd Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernds at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
1 - 100 of 218 matches
Mail list logo
