https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81519
--- Comment #9 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Daniel Santos from comment #7)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #4)
> > Ok, so I've briefly investigated source code and providing such information
> > is definitely not a simple task :/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31357
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31357
--- Comment #4 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: sandra
Date: Sun Nov 18 04:09:14 2018
New Revision: 266246
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266246&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-11-17 Eric Gallager
Sandra Loosemore
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88052
--- Comment #4 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Proposed patch:
diff --git a/libgfortran/io/format.c b/libgfortran/io/format.c
index f5d3158d21d..5ad57bef316 100644
--- a/libgfortran/io/format.c
+++ b/libgfortran/io/format.c
@@ -46,7 +46,8 @@ static const
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30091
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sandra at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81867
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Component|c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87695
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dory at satx dot rr.com
--- Comment #2 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87771
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88067
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87771
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||braddock.c at husky dot neu.edu
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29188
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
CC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85925
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #45029|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88065
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16615
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87984
--- Comment #12 from Segher Boessenkool ---
The lifetime of "a" ends where the for block ends. It is also wholly
irrelevant here.
If LLVM implement other semantics than GCC here, report that bug to LLVM.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88074
Bug ID: 88074
Summary: g++ hangs on math expression
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80864
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Expanded testcase:
struct S {
char c[1];
};
template
void
fn ()
{
constexpr S s1 = S{};
constexpr S s2 = S{{}};
constexpr S s3 = S{{{}}};
constexpr S s4 = {};
constexpr S s5 = {{}};
con
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88073
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88073
Bug ID: 88073
Summary: Internal compiler error compiling WHERE construct
with -O or -O2
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87851
--- Comment #5 from Janne Blomqvist ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #4)
> > Yes, but the return type on the library side changed.
>
> When and how do you see that?
As part of my patch to change the string length type, in the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87881
--- Comment #8 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #7)
> *** Bug 88068 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Hi Dominique,
I am getting nowhere with this. I have tested everything that I can think of
ar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83522
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68241
Bug 68241 depends on bug 83522, which changed state.
Bug 83522 Summary: ICE on allocatable string reference, string(:)(:)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83522
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88052
--- Comment #3 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to john.harper from comment #0)
--- snip ---
>
> If the second print statement is changed to
> print "(AF9.6)",'pi =',4*atan(1.0)
> then the error is correctly diagnosed.
Note that in the latter
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88072
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88072
Bug ID: 88072
Summary: gfortran crashes with an internal compiler error
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87727
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4225
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4225
--- Comment #5 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: sandra
Date: Sat Nov 17 16:59:26 2018
New Revision: 266240
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266240&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-11-17 Sandra Loosemore
PR c++/4225
gc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87851
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Yes, but the return type on the library side changed.
When and how do you see that?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4025
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4025
--- Comment #8 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: sandra
Date: Sat Nov 17 16:05:45 2018
New Revision: 266239
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266239&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-11-17 Sandra Loosemore
PR c++/4025
gc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87546
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87727
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Most likely r265398, i.e. another far-reaching RTL change like r264897.
The change seems to be a clear pessimization on SPARC, especially on small
functions where there is often
mov %o0, %g1
at the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87546
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sat Nov 17 15:10:48 2018
New Revision: 266237
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266237&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/87546
* tree-vect-patterns.c (vect_lo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88018
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sat Nov 17 15:09:43 2018
New Revision: 266236
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266236&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/88018
* cfgrtl.c (fixup_abnormal_edges
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87851
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #3 from Thomas Koenig -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88039
--- Comment #1 from Iain Buclaw ---
(In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #0)
>
> The problem obviously is that the native assemblers don't support UTF-8 in
> identifiers (and I bet there are other non-gas assemblers that don't either).
>
Do w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87851
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87923
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88066
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85925
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #44983|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85925
--- Comment #17 from Eric Botcazou ---
On further thoughts, it might be possible to rescue the mechanism because the
problem here is that a ZERO_EXTRACT is happily rewritten from SI to HImode,
thus breaking the WORD_REGISTER_OPERATIONS semantics.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78444
--- Comment #15 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #14)
> > I think that adding
> >
> > if (TARGET_MACHO && crtl->profile)
> > {
> > crtl->preferred_stack_boundary = 128;
> > crtl->stack_alignment_needed = 128;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87957
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka ---
ICE fixed, but lets keep the PR open to track the fact that warning is
quite confused.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87957
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Sat Nov 17 11:35:01 2018
New Revision: 266235
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266235&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR ipa/87957
* ipa-devirt.c (warn_odr): Look for main vari
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78444
--- Comment #14 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #13)
> (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #12)
> > + /* If we're profiling, we don't have a leaf. */
> > + gcc_assert (!crtl->is_leaf || !crtl->profile);
> >stac
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87824
--- Comment #11 from ibuclaw at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ibuclaw
Date: Sat Nov 17 11:01:00 2018
New Revision: 266234
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266234&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix wrong alignment returned by .alignof property.
The D l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87715
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Version|8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88071
Bug ID: 88071
Summary: [9 Regression] ICE: verify_gimple failed (error: dead
STMT in EH table)
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-va
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78444
--- Comment #13 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #12)
> + /* If we're profiling, we don't have a leaf. */
> + gcc_assert (!crtl->is_leaf || !crtl->profile);
>stack_alignment_needed = crtl->stack_alignment_needed /
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87984
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87984
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
CC|
53 matches
Mail list logo
