[Bug c++/78843] New: error: 'functionname' was not declared in this scope

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78843 Bug ID: 78843 Summary: error: 'functionname' was not declared in this scope Product: gcc Version: 6.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compone

[Bug c++/78842] New: "error: declaration of 'bool icase' shadows a parameter" should be warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78842 Bug ID: 78842 Summary: "error: declaration of 'bool icase' shadows a parameter" should be warning Product: gcc Version: 6.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: norm

[Bug c++/78841] [6 regression] optimizer bug (silent bad codegen)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78841 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/78826] jump bypasses non-POD

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78826 --- Comment #3 from Krzysztof Laskowski --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #2) > I assume GCC 4.5 stopped diagnosing it due to the revised specification > which only cares about trivial constructor or trivial destructor, not > PODness.

[Bug c++/78841] New: [6 regression] optimizer bug (silent bad codegen)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78841 Bug ID: 78841 Summary: [6 regression] optimizer bug (silent bad codegen) Product: gcc Version: 6.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug c++/78840] New: ICE with const variables in templates implicitly captured by nested lambda expressions

20161216. Earlier versions from 4.5.4 to 4.9.4, and clang successfully compiles the code. http://melpon.org/wandbox/permlink/hJM9b4zWQzTJeBLp int gvar; template void tfunc2(int, F) {} template void tfunc() { // ICE is caused when, in function templates, const int a = gvar; // a const variable

[Bug c++/78826] jump bypasses non-POD

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78826 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- GCC 4.4.7 gives an error: pod.cc: In function ‘void should_not_compile()’: pod.cc:6: error: jump to label ‘label’ pod.cc:4: error: from here pod.cc:5: error: enters scope of non-POD ‘non_pod_in_cpp03 x

[Bug other/78839] DWARF output different between GCC 5 and 6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78839 --- Comment #6 from Tom O'Connor --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5) > (In reply to Tom O'Connor from comment #4) > > Bitfields seemed to work fine in all GCC prior to 6, FWIW. The same > > attached source code when built with other

[Bug other/78839] DWARF output different between GCC 5 and 6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78839 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Tom O'Connor from comment #4) > Bitfields seemed to work fine in all GCC prior to 6, FWIW. The same > attached source code when built with other GCCs prior to 6 generates > DW_AT_data_member_loc

[Bug other/78839] DWARF output different between GCC 5 and 6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78839 --- Comment #4 from Tom O'Connor --- Bitfields seemed to work fine in all GCC prior to 6, FWIW. The same attached source code when built with other GCCs prior to 6 generates DW_AT_data_member_location = 0 for all the fields as expected. Only 6

[Bug other/78839] DWARF output different between GCC 5 and 6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78839 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- IIRC bitfield are broken for dwarf2/3 and there is another mechanism for them for dwarf5.

[Bug other/78839] DWARF output different between GCC 5 and 6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78839 --- Comment #2 from Tom O'Connor --- Created attachment 40355 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40355&action=edit debuginfo from a GCC 6.1.0 build of s.c

[Bug other/78839] DWARF output different between GCC 5 and 6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78839 --- Comment #1 from Tom O'Connor --- Created attachment 40354 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40354&action=edit debuginfo from a GCC 5.4.0 build of s.c

[Bug other/78839] New: DWARF output different between GCC 5 and 6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78839 Bug ID: 78839 Summary: DWARF output different between GCC 5 and 6 Product: gcc Version: 6.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: other

[Bug target/71216] [4.9/5/6/7 Regression] Incorrect PPC assembly due to inserted .machine pseudo-op

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71216 --- Comment #8 from Segher Boessenkool --- Hi Rin, > However, I have a question on this fix. How about the case where > "-Wa,-mXXX" option is given without "-mcpu=YYY" option specified? That might or might not work; the user had better know wha

[Bug target/78516] [7 Regression] ICE in lra_assign for e500v2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78516 --- Comment #9 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- That LRA patch (on top of the previous patch) allows the glibc build to complete. Now running gcc/g++/libstdc++ testsuites (I haven't run them with an unmodified copy of the same GCC versi

[Bug fortran/56691] [OOP] Allocatable array: wrong offset when passing to CLASS dummy

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56691 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work|6.2.0, 7.0 | Target Milestone|6.2

[Bug target/78838] New: msp430 option -mcode-region=either, -ffunction-sections, and interrupt function attributes cause incorrect section to be created

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78838 Bug ID: 78838 Summary: msp430 option -mcode-region=either, -ffunction-sections, and interrupt function attributes cause incorrect section to be created Product: gcc

[Bug driver/70936] Hard-coded C++ header paths and relocation problem on Windows

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70936 --- Comment #11 from Rolf Eike Beer --- I configured with: ../gcc-host/configure --target=i686-unknown-linux-gnu --host=x86_64-pc-linux- gnu --build=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu --program-prefix=i686-unknown-linux-gnu- -- with-sysroot=/opt/emlix/test/sys

[Bug target/78516] [7 Regression] ICE in lra_assign for e500v2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78516 Peter Bergner changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug fortran/56691] [OOP] Allocatable array: wrong offset when passing to CLASS dummy

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56691 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|NEW Resolution|FIXED

[Bug fortran/56691] [OOP] Allocatable array: wrong offset when passing to CLASS dummy

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56691 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Known to work|

[Bug fortran/78661] [F03] Namelist output missing object designator under DTIO

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78661 --- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Btw, this variant is wrongly rejected: MODULE m IMPLICIT NONE TYPE :: t CHARACTER :: c CONTAINS PROCEDURE :: write_formatted GENERIC :: WRITE(FORMATTED) => write_formatted END

[Bug fortran/78661] [F03] Namelist output missing object designator under DTIO

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78661 --- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- I think this should fix it: Index: libgfortran/io/write.c === --- libgfortran/io/write.c (revision 243729) +++ libgfortran/io/w

[Bug rtl-optimization/78580] [6/7 Regression] Segfault in gcc with multilib (-m32) and -ffixed-*

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78580 --- Comment #3 from Vladimir Makarov --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2) > > So, is the bug that i?86 needs Q_REGS to be an allocno class always (shall > ix86_additional_allocno_class_p return true also for Q_REGS? Just for -m32 > or

[Bug middle-end/78837] New: missing -Walloca-larger-than on a call in a ternary expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78837 Bug ID: 78837 Summary: missing -Walloca-larger-than on a call in a ternary expression Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal P

[Bug fortran/78661] [F03] Namelist output missing object designator under DTIO

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78661 --- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Reduced test case: MODULE m IMPLICIT NONE TYPE :: t CHARACTER :: c CONTAINS PROCEDURE :: write_formatted GENERIC :: WRITE(FORMATTED) => write_formatted END TYPE CONTAINS SUBRO

[Bug fortran/56691] [OOP] Allocatable array: wrong offset when passing to CLASS dummy

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56691 physiker at toast2 dot net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||physiker at toast2 dot net -

[Bug ada/62122] GNAT RM: flaw in example of @node Attribute Unrestricted_Access

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62122 --- Comment #2 from Georg --- Created attachment 40352 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40352&action=edit changes to example in GNAT RM section on Unrestricted_Access Since variable Global needs initialization, I have added a

[Bug c++/71972] [6 Regression] ICE with "-std=c++14" on x86_64-linux-gnu (internal compiler error: Segmentation fault, cxx_eval_store_expression)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71972 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gcc at tnix dot eu --- Comment #8 from J

[Bug c++/71229] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault, when copying an array in a constexpr function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71229 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/71226] [C++14] ICE in fold_binary_loc, at fold-const.c:9252, from constexpr function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71226 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/71972] [6 Regression] ICE with "-std=c++14" on x86_64-linux-gnu (internal compiler error: Segmentation fault, cxx_eval_store_expression)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71972 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gccbug at kundor dot org --- Comment #7

[Bug preprocessor/78836] New: ICE in get_source_location_for_substring, at input.c:1461

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78836 Bug ID: 78836 Summary: ICE in get_source_location_for_substring, at input.c:1461 Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priori

[Bug c++/71226] [C++14] ICE in fold_binary_loc, at fold-const.c:9252, from constexpr function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71226 --- Comment #4 from Nick Matteo --- Appears to be fixed in GCC 6.2.0.

[Bug middle-end/78622] [7 Regression] -Wformat-length/-fprintf-return-value incorrect with overflow/wrapping

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78622 --- Comment #5 from Jerry DeLisle --- Author: jvdelisle Date: Fri Dec 16 20:27:51 2016 New Revision: 243765 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243765&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2016-12-16 Jerry DeLisle PR fortran/78622 * io.c (

[Bug fortran/78757] [7 Regression] ICE with function returning a pointer to a character

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78757 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/78757] [7 Regression] ICE with function returning a pointer to a character

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78757 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Fri Dec 16 19:41:13 2016 New Revision: 243761 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243761&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR fortran/78757 * trans-expr.c (gfc_conv_procedure_call):

[Bug debug/72828] ICE in clone_tree_partial when compiling with -fdebug-types-section

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72828 --- Comment #7 from Nathan Sidwell --- With 78835 patched using Jakub's diff in comment 1, this no longer ices.

[Bug rtl-optimization/65618] [5/6/7 Regression] gnat bootstrap comparison failure on mips{,el}-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65618 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW Component|target

[Bug ipa/77905] [5/6 Regression] ICE at -Os and above in both 32-bit and 64-bit modes on x86_64-linux-gnu (internal compiler error: in ipa_comdats, at ipa-comdats.c:352)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77905 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[5/6/7 Regression] ICE at |[5/6 Regression] ICE at -Os

[Bug debug/77844] [5 Regression] Compilation of simple C++ example exhaust memory

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77844 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[5/7 Regression]|[5 Regression] Compilation

[Bug debug/78835] [7 regression] ICE with -fdebug-types-section and member function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78835 --- Comment #3 from Nathan Sidwell --- started failing with: r240578 | rguenth | 2016-09-28 07:30:19 -0700 (Wed, 28 Sep 2016) | 17 lines 2016-09-28 Richard Biener * dwarf2out.c (struct die_struct): Add removed flag. (lookup_t

[Bug debug/78835] [7 regression] ICE with -fdebug-types-section and member function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78835 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug debug/78835] [7 regression] ICE with -fdebug-types-section and member function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78835 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug bootstrap/78817] stage2 bootstrap failure in vec.h:1613:5: error: argument 1 null where non-null expected after r243661

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78817 --- Comment #19 from Martin Sebor --- (In reply to dave.anglin from comment #18) > The change didn't fix build on hppa-linux: This should be fixed in the patch referenced in comment #16, though the patch is yet to be reviewed and judging by the

[Bug fortran/78822] [cleanup] replace static char buffers by std:string

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78822 --- Comment #20 from Pedro Alves --- And in addition, since GCC is already using new/new[] to heap allocate its own classes, GCC is _already_ inconsistent with allocation failure -- if one of those currently fails, you'll end up with a C++ except

[Bug fortran/78822] [cleanup] replace static char buffers by std:string

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78822 Pedro Alves changed: What|Removed |Added CC||palves at redhat dot com --- Comment #19 f

[Bug c/78829] bit-rotten "C99 mode" references in GCC manual

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78829 --- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- Note that some of these (e.g. VLAs) are extensions in C++ as well. And some include features beyond the standard ones (e.g. _Complex is standard C99, but the syntax for complex constants,

[Bug ipa/71190] [7 Regression] ICE in assemble_variable_contents, at varasm.c:2054

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71190 Matthias Klose changed: What|Removed |Added CC||doko at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #10

[Bug libgcc/78804] [RX] -m64bit-doubles does not work

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78804 --- Comment #3 from Oleg Endo --- (In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #2) > > It is almost certainly a bug in the RX specific parts of the libgcc > configuration > > It is unlikely that the actual code for the _COM_CONVd32s function is w

[Bug debug/78835] New: [7 regression] ICE with -fdebug-types-section and member function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78835 Bug ID: 78835 Summary: [7 regression] ICE with -fdebug-types-section and member function Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug sanitizer/78832] [7 Regression] -fcompare-debug failure (length) with -fsanitize=address

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78832 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 40351 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40351&action=edit gcc7-pr78832.patch Untested fix. I'm sure this started with r243611. The problem is that gsi_remove updates g

[Bug libstdc++/78830] std::prev accepts ForwardIterator-s

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78830 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug driver/78772] -fstrict-aliasing should turn on Wstrict-aliasing automaticly

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78772 --- Comment #11 from Jim Wilson --- This language has been in the standard since ANSI C 89/ISO C 90. >extern char buf[32]; >int *a = (int *)&(buf[16]); >int result = *a; //is this ok? or we have to use memcpy(&result, &buf[16], >>sizeof(int))?

[Bug lto/78834] ICE if I try to opt-out from -flto using pragma

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78834 Markus Trippelsdorf changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug fortran/78814] ICE in symbol_rank, at fortran/interface.c:1265

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78814 --- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > Confirmed, started with 4.6.0. ?? With 4.6 and 4.7 I get Fatal Error: Unlimited polymorphism at (1) not yet supported

[Bug lto/78834] New: ICE if I try to opt-out from -flto using pragma

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78834 Bug ID: 78834 Summary: ICE if I try to opt-out from -flto using pragma Product: gcc Version: 4.9.2 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: ice-on-valid-code, lto Severity: normal

[Bug c/78408] C loop initial declarations generate wrong code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78408 --- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek --- Author: jakub Date: Fri Dec 16 15:57:43 2016 New Revision: 243753 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243753&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR c/78408 * tree-ssa-ccp.c: Include tree-dfa.h.

[Bug tree-optimization/78819] [7 Regression] Wrong code with VRP caused by register assertions along default switch labels

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78819 --- Comment #6 from Patrick Palka --- Thanks Marek for fixing this.

[Bug fortran/78822] [cleanup] replace static char buffers by std:string

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78822 --- Comment #18 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #17) > There are several PRs open for translation: pr52274 and links. Thanks of the hint. I think in particular PR 38573 is relevant for our discussi

[Bug fortran/78822] [cleanup] replace static char buffers by std:string

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78822 --- Comment #17 from Dominique d'Humieres --- There are several PRs open for translation: pr52274 and links.

[Bug fortran/78822] [cleanup] replace static char buffers by std:string

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78822 --- Comment #16 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #15) > Some comments: Thanks! > 1) this still doesn't solve the translations issue in many places > (gfc_compare_interfaces etc.); True. I don't wanna o

[Bug libfortran/78833] Misleading IOMSG after failed WRITE(...,POS=) on unconnected formatted stream file

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78833 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug sanitizer/78832] [7 Regression] -fcompare-debug failure (length) with -fsanitize=address

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78832 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/78060] [7 Regression] -O3 causes "error: type mismatch in binary expression"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78060 --- Comment #7 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: rsandifo Date: Fri Dec 16 15:14:47 2016 New Revision: 243752 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243752&root=gcc&view=rev Log: [sve-branch] Backport fix pr78060 pr78061 pr78088 Backp

[Bug tree-optimization/78061] [7 Regression] -O3 causes "Error: definition in block 117 does not dominate use in block 164"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78061 --- Comment #6 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: rsandifo Date: Fri Dec 16 15:14:47 2016 New Revision: 243752 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243752&root=gcc&view=rev Log: [sve-branch] Backport fix pr78060 pr78061 pr78088 Backp

[Bug tree-optimization/78088] [7 Regression] error: non-trivial conversion in unary operation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78088 --- Comment #5 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: rsandifo Date: Fri Dec 16 15:14:47 2016 New Revision: 243752 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243752&root=gcc&view=rev Log: [sve-branch] Backport fix pr78060 pr78061 pr78088 Backp

[Bug fortran/78822] [cleanup] replace static char buffers by std:string

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78822 --- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek --- Comment on attachment 40350 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40350 patch using build_message_string Some comments: 1) this still doesn't solve the translations issue in many places (gfc_

[Bug fortran/78822] [cleanup] replace static char buffers by std:string

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78822 --- Comment #14 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 40350 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40350&action=edit patch using build_message_string So here is another patch, similar to the one in comment 5, but usin

[Bug libfortran/78833] Misleading IOMSG after failed WRITE(...,POS=) on unconnected formatted stream file

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78833 --- Comment #1 from mecej4 at operamail dot com --- Created attachment 40349 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40349&action=edit Test program for reproducing bug in IOMSG Same source code as in main message, for your convenienc

[Bug libfortran/78833] New: Misleading IOMSG after failed WRITE(...,POS=) on unconnected formatted stream file

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78833 Bug ID: 78833 Summary: Misleading IOMSG after failed WRITE(...,POS=) on unconnected formatted stream file Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Seve

[Bug target/65618] [5/6/7 Regression] gnat bootstrap comparison failure on mips{,el}-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65618 --- Comment #9 from James Cowgill --- Created attachment 40348 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40348&action=edit pr-65618.patch

[Bug target/65618] [5/6/7 Regression] gnat bootstrap comparison failure on mips{,el}-linux-gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65618 James Cowgill changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rdsandiford at googlemail dot com --- C

[Bug target/78831] [nvptx] -mgomp -Os init_softstack_frame ICE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78831 Alexander Monakov changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/78819] [7 Regression] Wrong code with VRP caused by register assertions along default switch labels

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78819 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug sanitizer/78832] New: [7 Regression] -fcompare-debug failure (length) with -fsanitize=address

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78832 Bug ID: 78832 Summary: [7 Regression] -fcompare-debug failure (length) with -fsanitize=address Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/78819] [7 Regression] Wrong code with VRP caused by register assertions along default switch labels

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78819 --- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek --- Author: mpolacek Date: Fri Dec 16 14:19:44 2016 New Revision: 243746 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243746&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR tree-optimization/78819 * tree-vrp.c (find_switch_as

[Bug target/78831] New: [nvptx] -mgomp -Os init_softstack_frame ICE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78831 Bug ID: 78831 Summary: [nvptx] -mgomp -Os init_softstack_frame ICE Product: gcc Version: 7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target

[Bug libstdc++/78830] std::prev accepts ForwardIterator-s

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78830 --- Comment #2 from Andrzej Krzemienski --- Sorry, you are correct. As per [res.on.functions], passing types that do not satisfy the requirements is a UB, and therefore a well formed program. GCC is standard-compliant in this respect. So, I have

[Bug debug/72828] ICE in clone_tree_partial when compiling with -fdebug-types-section

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72828 Nathan Sidwell changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|

[Bug libgcc/78804] [RX] -m64bit-doubles does not work

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78804 --- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton --- Hi Oleg, > Nick, maybe you have an idea what's wrong here? It is almost certainly a bug in the RX specific parts of the libgcc configuration What happens is that GCC calls the function _COM_CONVd32s to

[Bug bootstrap/78817] stage2 bootstrap failure in vec.h:1613:5: error: argument 1 null where non-null expected after r243661

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78817 --- Comment #18 from dave.anglin at bell dot net --- On 2016-12-16, at 6:55 AM, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > Please revert this - I've rejected similar patches from Martin Liska recently. > You just slow down the compiler for no good reaso

[Bug fortran/78822] [cleanup] replace static char buffers by std:string

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78822 --- Comment #13 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #11) > BTW, yet another option (and I'd say much more readable) is just using > build_message_string function Yes, I think that's a good suggestion. Thanks

[Bug fortran/78822] [cleanup] replace static char buffers by std:string

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78822 --- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek --- Oh, and yet another thing, if these messages is something you pass to the user, then the fact that you mix up the diagnostic text with expanded arguments precludes translation. With using std::stringstream

[Bug fortran/78822] [cleanup] replace static char buffers by std:string

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78822 --- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek --- BTW, yet another option (and I'd say much more readable) is just using build_message_string function, so snprintf (errmsg, err_len, "Rank mismatch in argument '%s' (%i/%i)", s1-

[Bug fortran/78822] [cleanup] replace static char buffers by std:string

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78822 --- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #9) > best discuss this on the > mailing list rather than in the PR where others can more easily see it and > comment on it. Agreed. Will do.

[Bug c++/61636] generic lambda: segfault / "cannot call member function without object"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61636 Nathan Sidwell changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug fortran/78737] [OOP] linking error with deferred, undefined user-defined derived-type I/O

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78737 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--

[Bug fortran/78822] [cleanup] replace static char buffers by std:string

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78822 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek --- (In reply to janus from comment #8) > In general, doesn't this whole memory issue severely limit the usefulness of > C++ as an implementation language for GCC? It seems to imply that we cannot > use *any* STL

[Bug tree-optimization/67283] GCC regression over inlining of returned structures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67283 Xavier Roche changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||6.1.0, 6.2.0 Known to fail|

[Bug middle-end/78824] multiple add should in my opinion be optimized to multiplication

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78824 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/78822] [cleanup] replace static char buffers by std:string

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78822 --- Comment #8 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- In general, doesn't this whole memory issue severely limit the usefulness of C++ as an implementation language for GCC? It seems to imply that we cannot use *any* STL containers? Or do I misundersta

[Bug sanitizer/78815] [7 Regression] ICE: segfault with -fopenmp -fsanitize=address

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78815 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 Target Milestone|---

[Bug rtl-optimization/78812] [5/6/7 Regression] Wrong code generation due to hoisting memory load across function call

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78812 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2

[Bug bootstrap/78817] stage2 bootstrap failure in vec.h:1613:5: error: argument 1 null where non-null expected after r243661

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78817 --- Comment #17 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #15) > Author: msebor > Date: Fri Dec 16 02:57:22 2016 > New Revision: 243736 > > URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243736&root=gcc&view=rev > Log: > PR bootstrap/

[Bug fortran/78822] [cleanup] replace static char buffers by std:string

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78822 --- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6) > Dunno, you can perhaps try it (put a breakpoint somewhere before you > construct the std::string, when you reach it, put a breakpoint on malloc and > wh

[Bug tree-optimization/78819] [7 Regression] Wrong code with VRP caused by register assertions along default switch labels

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78819 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 Version|unknown

[Bug tree-optimization/78821] GCC7: Copying whole 32 bits structure field by field not optimised into copying whole 32 bits at once

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78821 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization Status|

[Bug middle-end/78824] multiple add should in my opinion be optimized to multiplication

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78824 --- Comment #5 from Freddie Chopin --- Sure, more data points show that this is most likely a problem in a target component, not in middle-end or c front-end.

  1   2   >