https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80881
Daniel Starke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work|5.3.0 |
--- Comment #16 from Daniel Starke ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81212
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sat Dec 2 07:57:04 2017
New Revision: 255354
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255354&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/81212
* tree-cfg.c (pass_warn_function_return::exec
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78643
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sat Dec 2 07:54:47 2017
New Revision: 255353
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255353&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/78643
PR target/80583
* expr.c (get_inne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80583
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sat Dec 2 07:54:47 2017
New Revision: 255353
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255353&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/78643
PR target/80583
* expr.c (get_inne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81165
--- Comment #8 from Alexandre Oliva ---
It is combine that simplifies a compare of _9 (aka t1) with 1: it knows _9 is
either -1 or 0 from the &1 followed by -1, so it can't be equal to 1. From
that simplification, others follow, and the loop exi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83254
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83243
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83255
Bug ID: 83255
Summary: [8 Regression] [graphite] Wrong code w/ -O1
-floop-nest-optimize
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83254
--- Comment #2 from Ben Woodard ---
my bad my trunk was out of date.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83254
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43871
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Sat Dec 2 01:23:41 2017
New Revision: 255349
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255349&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
rs6000: Set rs6000_cpu correctly (PR43871)
We set rs6000_cpu based
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81165
--- Comment #7 from Alexandre Oliva ---
it may very well be the case that it is gcc7 that's buggy in optimizing out the
loop. after all, there is a divide-by-x0 in the loop entry test and, save for
global optimizations, the compiler couldn't tel
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83254
Bug ID: 83254
Summary: gfortran doesn't consider c_loc addresses c_associated
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83253
Bug ID: 83253
Summary: -ftree-slsr causes performance regression
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-op
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83252
Bug ID: 83252
Summary: Wrong code with "-march=skylake-avx512 -O3"
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83236
--- Comment #3 from Zack Weinberg ---
Maybe name_reserved_for_implementation_p should be a langhook?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81959
--- Comment #2 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Fri Dec 1 23:52:20 2017
New Revision: 255341
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255341&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2017-12-01 Michael Meissner
PR target/81959
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83251
--- Comment #1 from Paul Eggert ---
Created attachment 42774
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42774&action=edit
Test case subroutines (you also need foomain.i)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83251
Bug ID: 83251
Summary: __builtin___bnd_narrow_ptr_bounds(x, x, ...) generates
wrong code that modifies a constant
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83224
--- Comment #10 from urbanjost at comcast dot net ---
Impressively quick resolution.
Thanks again!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82103
--- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse ---
This warning is "less wrong" than the other related ones. If frame_size is 0,
this does call memset(,,-1). And there is an explicit test for frame_size == 0
in the function, which makes it look like 0 is not su
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83239
--- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #1)
> In the mean time, we fail to find some VRP optimizations that might help
> with the warning.
>
> _1 = _186 + 18446744073709551614;
> if (_1 > _186)
>
> _186: [3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82103
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|rtl-optimization|tree-optimization
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83250
Bug ID: 83250
Summary: _mm256_zextsi128_si256 missing for AVX2 zero extension
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83236
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
Candidate patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-12/msg00066.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83240
--- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse ---
(this PR is vaguely related to PR 57974)
Unrelated, but I am surprised we don't end up computing at compile-time in this
example. We vectorize sqrt before unrolling the first loop and getting the
constants. An
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83231
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83239
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #3 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83239
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81288
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|segher at gc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81288
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Fri Dec 1 20:37:33 2017
New Revision: 255338
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255338&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
rs6000: Improve comparison rtx_cost (PR81288)
The current rs6000 rt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81288
--- Comment #4 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Fri Dec 1 20:35:52 2017
New Revision: 255337
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255337&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
rs6000: Improve comparison rtx_cost (PR81288)
The current rs6000 rt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50871
--- Comment #18 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #16)
> (In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #15)
> > > /home/jwakely/build/powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/include/
> > > complex:1951: warning: float
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79228
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79228
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Dec 1 20:19:07 2017
New Revision: 255335
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255335&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/79228 - extensions hide C++14 complex literal operators
li
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81158
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81158
--- Comment #5 from Bill Schmidt ---
That would make sense. I think this can be closed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83249
Bug ID: 83249
Summary: C++11 Parameter pack deduced incorrectly in decltype
return declaration
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80061
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||benni.buch at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83242
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83240
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80135
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The glibc people should know (or you can try building glibc).
That said, I think rejecting structs with flexible array members is
unnecessary, e.g. the C FE doesn't reject them either, what we should reject i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83246
--- Comment #3 from urbanjost at comcast dot net ---
Created attachment 42772
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42772&action=edit
shorter case for internal compiler error
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83246
--- Comment #2 from urbanjost at comcast dot net ---
Created attachment 42771
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42771&action=edit
shorter case for just getting loader error
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83246
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=82186
--- Comment #6 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
For C, what is supposed to happen is that every call to groktypename where
there might be side effects from the type name passes a non-null EXPR
argument, and then the caller arranges for e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80135
--- Comment #6 from Martin Sebor ---
I'll see what I can do. You had some concerns with rejecting this code in bug
78635 comment 9. Presumably you have resolved those to your own satisfaction?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81212
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80135
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Can you please find time for that during GCC 8 stage3/stage4?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83248
Bug ID: 83248
Summary: Spuriously identifying template arguments
Product: gcc
Version: 5.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80135
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor ---
Yes, Jason and I agreed that arrays of structs with flexible array members
should be rejected (thus ice-on-invalid-code). It was not my intend to accept
this code. I just haven't gotten around to fixing it y
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83247
Bug ID: 83247
Summary: simplify (int)a_long < 0 when we know a_long fits in
int
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83243
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
--- Comment #2 from Andrew P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83244
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c++ |inline-asm
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82367
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83224
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68241
Bug 68241 depends on bug 83224, which changed state.
Bug 83224 Summary: creating character array from elements shorter than declared
does not pad with whitespace properly and aborts
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83224
W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83224
--- Comment #8 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Fri Dec 1 18:06:31 2017
New Revision: 255331
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255331&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-12-01 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/83224
* frontend
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81158
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81046
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68810
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
David, does your patchset solve this?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81046
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82522
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82522
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Fri Dec 1 17:50:59 2017
New Revision: 255330
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255330&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/82522 overload map insert functions for rvalues (LWG 2354)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83238
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82186
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Note C++ ICEs as well on the same testcase.
The problem (I guess for both FEs) is from where to emit the DECL_EXPRs, e.g.
in the C FE groktypename is called from many spots and I believe the middle-end
wants
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83246
Bug ID: 83246
Summary: internal compiler error or loader problem might be
related to a PARAMETER statement being in a BLOCK
Product: gcc
Version: 6.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82685
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83134
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83226
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83134
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Fri Dec 1 17:12:23 2017
New Revision: 255329
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255329&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/83134 Ensure std::__not_ converts B::value to bool
Backport
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83226
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Fri Dec 1 17:12:04 2017
New Revision: 255324
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255324&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/83226 avoid forming pointer-to-reference type
Backport from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82685
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Fri Dec 1 17:12:07 2017
New Revision: 255325
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255325&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/82685 add 'noexcept' to string_view literals
Backport from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83245
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82979
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82173
Bug 82173 depends on bug 82979, which changed state.
Bug 82979 Summary: [PDT] [F2003] [ice-on-invalid] ICE (segfault) on invalid
type-param-name-list in PDT declaration
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82979
What|Remov
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83245
Bug ID: 83245
Summary: [8 regression] several tests fail starting with
r255258
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83230
--- Comment #5 from Jürgen Reuter ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
> The Makefile doesn't have any -O* options, is this all without optimizations?
> I admit I've been only compiling the fortran source with trunk f951, the
> rest wi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83230
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The Makefile doesn't have any -O* options, is this all without optimizations?
I admit I've been only compiling the fortran source with trunk f951, the rest
with the system gcc (6.3.1), but for f951 I've tried
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83241
--- Comment #3 from Arnd Bergmann ---
That patch fixes the ICE for me on the original source file and the reduced
test case, thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83230
--- Comment #3 from Jürgen Reuter ---
This is the full back trace that I get:
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
__GI___libc_free (mem=0x6530302e30202c30) at malloc.c:2931
2931malloc.c: No such file or directory.
(gdb) bt
#0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83230
--- Comment #2 from Jürgen Reuter ---
I see this problem both on MAC OS X 10.13.1 with r254916 (and the patch
mentioned) as well as on Ubuntu 14.04.5 LTS with r255190. r253161 still worked
fine. We see this kind of behaviour in two different bind
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83230
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83177
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ienkovich at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83244
--- Comment #2 from Andrzej Lichnerowicz ---
The resolution doesn't seem appropriate. GCC is creating invalid assembly, and
user should not be held responsible for writing correct code, because why have
any warnings and errors at all.
OTOH, it i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83170
--- Comment #5 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Looks like a dup of PR83241. The untested patch posted there fixes the issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83128
--- Comment #4 from denis.campredon at gmail dot com ---
Hi Richard,
Thanks for your quick response.
I don't know if I should open a new bug or not, but your patch does not seems
to handle casts. It fails to optimize the following snippet.
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83170
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Priori
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83240
--- Comment #2 from Andreas Gustafsson ---
Re "simply don't use -ffast-math if you are dealing with stuff like denormals",
the documentation for -ffinite-math-only (which is implied by -ffast-math) says
"Allow optimizations for floating-point ari
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83244
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83241
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 42768
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42768&action=edit
gcc8-pr83241.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82978
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82173
Bug 82173 depends on bug 82978, which changed state.
Bug 82978 Summary: [PDT] [F2003] Paramaterized Derived Type LEN parameters take
the latest value per-kind
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82978
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82173
Bug 82173 depends on bug 82866, which changed state.
Bug 82866 Summary: [PDT] ICE in resolve_fl_derived0, at fortran/resolve.c:14004
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82866
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82866
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82173
Bug 82173 depends on bug 82720, which changed state.
Bug 82720 Summary: [PDT] ICE in gfc_conv_component_ref, at
fortran/trans-expr.c:2400
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82720
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83244
Bug ID: 83244
Summary: inline assembly does not verify input operands
allocation
Product: gcc
Version: 6.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82720
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82173
Bug 82173 depends on bug 82719, which changed state.
Bug 82719 Summary: [PDT] ICE in transfer_expr, at fortran/trans-io.c:2393
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82719
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82719
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
1 - 100 of 181 matches
Mail list logo
