https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78387
--- Comment #10 from Jim Wilson ---
newunit_stack needs to be allocated dynamically, just like the newunits array.
I modified libgfortran to compute the highest value of newunit_tos, and print
it when the program exits. I set NEWUNIT_STACK_SIZE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81172
--- Comment #5 from Xi Ruoyao ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #4)
> Clang diagnoses the the cases where the offset or index is a constant
> expression (and under the expected option) but it doesn't diagnose others
> where the offset/i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81270
Bug ID: 81270
Summary: [concepts] ill-formed code with a constrained variable
declaration with multiple declarators with different
deduced types not rejected
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78387
--- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Related to pr81195 and pr81241? Works on darwin with 8 threads.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78387
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45976
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54769
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54769
--- Comment #9 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Jun 30 22:20:22 2017
New Revision: 249857
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249857&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/54769 - wrong lookup of dependent template-name.
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81257
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Jun 30 22:20:22 2017
New Revision: 249857
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249857&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/54769 - wrong lookup of dependent template-name.
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81257
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81261
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Fri Jun 30 21:09:13 2017
New Revision: 249856
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249856&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/81261
* tree-inline.c (expand_call_inline): Combin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54769
--- Comment #8 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Jun 30 21:08:53 2017
New Revision: 249855
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249855&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/81257 - ICE with invalid ::template.
PR c++/54769
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81257
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Jun 30 21:08:53 2017
New Revision: 249855
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249855&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/81257 - ICE with invalid ::template.
PR c++/54769
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81245
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81269
--- Comment #1 from Martin Sebor ---
Created attachment 41660
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41660&action=edit
Even more unusual behavior seen in my enhancement.
Attached is another screenshot, this one showing even more un
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81269
Bug ID: 81269
Summary: wrong color highlighting in -Wrestrict warnings
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81268
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Targe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81268
Bug ID: 81268
Summary: [avr] Support __gcc_isr pseudo-instruction for more
efficient ISR prologues
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68467
--- Comment #18 from Carlos Soto ---
(In reply to angelo from comment #17)
> Hi Carlos,
>
> maybe you can try one of these 2 toolchains i prepared years ago:
>
> http://sysam.it/toolchains.html
>
> Regads,
> Angelo
>
Hi angelo,
thanks for po
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81214
--- Comment #5 from Michael Meissner ---
The change commited in svn id 249840, does fix the problem on the PowerPC.
Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81263
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 from TC ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58012
Mario Emmenlauer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mario at emmenlauer dot de
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81267
--- Comment #1 from Pedro Alves ---
xref:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-06/msg00827.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81162
--- Comment #7 from Bill Schmidt ---
This case comes up when we're going to replace a NEGATE_EXPR with a PLUS_EXPR
or MINUS_EXPR. This is another case of an unprofitable replacement that should
be avoided anyway. So I think the following fix is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81263
W E Brown changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||webrown.cpp at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81192
--- Comment #12 from Tom de Vries ---
Currently bootstrapping and reg-testing patch series on x86_64.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81192
--- Comment #11 from Tom de Vries ---
Created attachment 41658
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41658&action=edit
3 - Ignore EDGE_DFS_BACK in tail-merge
This is a fix for the issue noted in comment 7: EDGE_DFS_BACK is in an
u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81225
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[6/7/8 Regression] ICE with |[6/7 Regression] ICE with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81192
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #41650|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81192
--- Comment #9 from Tom de Vries ---
Created attachment 41656
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41656&action=edit
1 - Fix sigsegv in find_same_succ_bb
Essentially the same as the fix in comment 3.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81259
Bug ID: 81259
Summary: Class template deduction cannot work on Constructor
without parameters in some cases
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Seve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81265
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81266
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This was previously only run for GNU/Linux, Solaris and AIX, but is now enabled
for all pthreads targets. I don't think this particular test will ever pass for
targets where is_pointer is true.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81260
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80014
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80014
--- Comment #6 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Fri Jun 30 15:20:55 2017
New Revision: 249845
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249845&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix location of typeid() (PR c++/80014)
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
PR c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81267
Bug ID: 81267
Summary: Missing DW_AT_type in DW_TAG_typedef of "typedef of
typedef of void"
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81266
Bug ID: 81266
Summary: FAIL: 30_threads/thread/native_handle/typesizes.cc
execution test on darwin
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81172
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81225
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Jun 30 14:52:24 2017
New Revision: 249844
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249844&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/81225
* config/i386/sse.md (vec_extract_lo_): Fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55203
--- Comment #20 from Martin Sebor ---
*** Bug 81250 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81250
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81265
--- Comment #1 from Anton Shterenlikht ---
On Cray seems to run fine too.
Sorry for crooked rushed English.
The code itself is very simple, so
should be clear what's going on.
But I think if I put all code in a single
file, then I cannot reprodu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81265
Bug ID: 81265
Summary: allocatable coarrays in submodule subroutines wrongly
identified as unallocated
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81214
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||8.0
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81214
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Fri Jun 30 13:51:19 2017
New Revision: 249840
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249840&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix removal of ifunc (PR ipa/81214).
2017-06-30 Martin Liska
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81264
Bug ID: 81264
Summary: fixincludes/fixincl.c fails on DEBUG build
Product: gcc
Version: 6.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80510
--- Comment #10 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Fri Jun 30 12:09:12 2017
New Revision: 249836
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249836&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2017-06-30 Michael Meissner
Backport from mainlin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81229
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81262
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 41654
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41654&action=edit
gcc8-pr81262.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81229
--- Comment #6 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Author: nathan
Date: Fri Jun 30 11:40:08 2017
New Revision: 249835
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249835&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/81229
* name-lookup.c (do_pushdecl): Reset IDENTI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55203
--- Comment #19 from Jonathan Wakely ---
cppcheck isn't a compiler, it just does simple pattern matching and maybe uses
whitelists/blacklists of types. I don't think anything it does is really
relevant to GCC.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81262
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81262
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Bet asm goto isn't handled correctly in fix_up_fall_thru_edges or in
add_labels_and_missing_jumps.
Looking at the former, I'm puzzled how it works at all, seems e.g. the
cond_jump variable can hold edge for c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80597
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54769
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81020
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81258
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55203
Jon Grant changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jg at jguk dot org
--- Comment #18 from Jon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81020
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81262
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|7.0 |8.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81261
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|7.0 |8.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81021
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||8.0
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81021
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Fri Jun 30 08:51:00 2017
New Revision: 249833
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249833&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Call BUILT_IN_ASAN_HANDLE_NO_RETURN before BUILT_IN_UNWIND_RESUME (PR
sani
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81258
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81257
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81262
Bug ID: 81262
Summary: [8 Regression] verify_flow_info failed for asmgoto
test-case with -fsanitize=undefined
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keyw
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55203
--- Comment #17 from Marc Glisse ---
I wonder if attributes unused / warn_unused should be automatically inherited
by classes when a member or base has it (with various rules, maybe unused has
priority over warn_unused). For a tuple of locks or a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81261
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81261
Bug ID: 81261
Summary: [8 Regression] ICE with -fno-guess-branch-probability
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81249
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81249
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Jun 30 08:08:33 2017
New Revision: 249831
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249831&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-06-30 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/81249
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55203
--- Comment #16 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I missed this update, sorry.
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #15)
> Jonathan, what's the next step? It sounds as though you don't think
> decorating nearly every libstdc++ class makes sense.
I'd
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81248
--- Comment #7 from wilhelm.me...@hs-kl.de ---
Looks like also no optimization is done for non-template function
g(const uint8_t&).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81253
Philipp changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
75 matches
Mail list logo