https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81436
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65703
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87955
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
URL|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65703
--- Comment #5 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: sandra
Date: Sun Nov 11 01:33:53 2018
New Revision: 266008
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266008&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-11-10 Sandra Loosemore
PR middle-end/65703
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87971
Nicolas Lesser changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87971
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
It's also accepted without using nested namespace definitions, and that's
intentional.
namespace one {
inline namespace two {}
}
namespace one {
namespace two {}
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87971
Bug ID: 87971
Summary: gcc allows nested namespace definition of inline
namespaces
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87938
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87936
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87970
Bug ID: 87970
Summary: Template Instantiation from empty parameter pack is
not diagnosed in class specialization
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87824
--- Comment #4 from Iain Buclaw ---
(In reply to Iain Buclaw from comment #3)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> > FAIL: runnable/eh.d -O2 execution test
> > FAIL: runnable/eh.d -O2 -shared-libphobos execution test
>
> On x86,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87968
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
--- Comment #1 from Thomas Koenig -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87969
Bug ID: 87969
Summary: -fcheck does not raise signal
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87968
Bug ID: 87968
Summary: [7/8/9 Regression] Warning about uninizialized
variables in array constructor
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82243
maik.riechert at arcor dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||maik.riechert at arcor dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87824
--- Comment #3 from Iain Buclaw ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> In i686-linux bootstrap/regtest, I see:
> === gdc tests ===
>
>
> Running target unix
> FAIL: runnable/cppa.d execution test
> FAIL: runnable/cp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87967
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87962
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 87960, which changed state.
Bug 87960 Summary: [9 Regression] Miscompilation of 527.cam4_r benchmark from
SPEC2017 w/ -O2 since r265946
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87960
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87960
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
20 matches
Mail list logo
