https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89809
JunMa changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||JunMa at linux dot alibaba.com
--- Comment #2 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82643
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89822
Bug ID: 89822
Summary: self mov on x86_64 and not optimized-out sub on
ARM/ARM64 in a jump table switch
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88347
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89821
Bug ID: 89821
Summary: Get a SIGFPE on a simple test of a kind=real128
variable with -ffpe-trap=invalid switch
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89808
--- Comment #8 from sduguay ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #6)
> In any case, I agree with confirming this as a bug: all warnings should be
> controllable by a -Wxxx option.
>
> Adding such an option is quite easy, and a good firs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88347
--- Comment #5 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Mon Mar 25 23:33:36 2019
New Revision: 269928
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269928&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/88347
PR rtl-optimization/88423
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88423
--- Comment #8 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Mon Mar 25 23:33:36 2019
New Revision: 269928
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269928&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/88347
PR rtl-optimization/88423
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70692
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This should get addressed more thoroughly by https://wg21.link/p0932
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85537
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|rtl-optimization|fortran
Summary|[7/8/9 Regres
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83855
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85537
--- Comment #11 from Thomas Koenig ---
r237104 fails for me, testing r237008.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89812
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89812
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Mon Mar 25 22:56:40 2019
New Revision: 269927
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269927&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/89812 - incorrect maximum in error: requested alignment '536870912'
e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89435
--- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou ---
*** Bug 89815 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89815
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86964
--- Comment #9 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Mon Mar 25 21:19:09 2019
New Revision: 269925
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269925&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR debug/86964
* dwarf2out.c (premark_used_variables): New
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79367
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Summ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89676
--- Comment #9 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Mon Mar 25 21:14:40 2019
New Revision: 269924
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269924&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-03-25 Vladimir Makarov
PR rtl-optimization/89676
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54367
Bug 54367 depends on bug 70515, which changed state.
Bug 70515 Summary: Nested lambdas causing invalid captured pointers on some
platforms
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70515
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70515
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87327
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88529
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
related to PR20408 (but not the same as the patch which Jason attached is
different)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85013
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[7/8/9 Regression] |[7/8 Regression]
|:1:4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84661
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[7/8/9 Regression] internal |[7/8 Regression] internal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84661
--- Comment #6 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Mon Mar 25 20:43:36 2019
New Revision: 269923
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269923&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
/cp
2019-03-25 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/84661
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85013
--- Comment #3 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Mon Mar 25 20:43:36 2019
New Revision: 269923
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269923&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
/cp
2019-03-25 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/84661
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88529
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89820
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88529
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||antoshkka at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89820
Bug ID: 89820
Summary: Returning empty type produces unnecessary instructions
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71861
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86429
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill ---
Reduced:
struct A
{
int i;
constexpr int f(const int&) const { return i; }
};
void g()
{
constexpr A a = { 42 };
[&](auto x) {
constexpr auto y = a.f(x);
}(24);
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71861
--- Comment #12 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Mon Mar 25 19:58:04 2019
New Revision: 269922
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269922&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
fix PR 71861
2019-03-25 Janus Weil
PR fortran/7186
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86429
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86521
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8/9 Regression] GCC 8 |[8 Regression] GCC 8
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87480
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8/9 Regression] SFINAE |[8 Regression] SFINAE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87748
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8/9 Regression] G++-8 |[8 Regression] G++-8 treats
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87480
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Mon Mar 25 18:27:08 2019
New Revision: 269921
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269921&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/87748 - substitution failure error with decltype.
This iss
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87748
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Mon Mar 25 18:27:08 2019
New Revision: 269921
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269921&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/87748 - substitution failure error with decltype.
This iss
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89808
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89767
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8/9 Regression] ICE with |[8 Regression] ICE with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89817
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89816
--- Comment #10 from Ville Voutilainen ---
Assignment can be made to avoid double-visitation, instead of using
_M_destructive_move/copy. Other than that, getting it to generate fewer table
items needs the idea from the other bug report.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89819
Ville Voutilainen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ville.voutilainen at gmail dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89815
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89816
--- Comment #9 from Antony Polukhin ---
BTW, I think there are some other cases where binary visitation could be
simplified to unary (significantly reducing the code size and improving the
compile times). I've filled Bug 89819, but looks like ass
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89819
Bug ID: 89819
Summary: [9 Regression] std::variant operators regressed since
GCC 8.3
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89796
--- Comment #6 from Arsène Pérard-Gayot ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> Created attachment 46018 [details]
> gcc9-pr89796.patch
>
> Untested fix.
>
> You could have used simpler
> #pragma omp atomic capture
> prev = c++;
> tha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67343
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ABI, wrong-code
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89818
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
And related to the upstream ABI issue:
https://github.com/itanium-cxx-abi/cxx-abi/issues/38 .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88413
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski ---
related to PR 67343.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89818
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
related to PR 88413 and PR 67343
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89818
Bug ID: 89818
Summary: possibly invalid name mangling
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89214
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[7/8/9 Regression] ICE in |[7/8 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89214
--- Comment #11 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Mon Mar 25 16:38:48 2019
New Revision: 269919
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269919&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/89214 - ICE when initializing aggregates with bases.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89816
Ville Voutilainen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89816
--- Comment #8 from Ville Voutilainen ---
Patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-03/msg01200.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89705
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[7/8/9 Regression] ICE in |[7/8 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89705
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Mon Mar 25 16:10:06 2019
New Revision: 269918
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269918&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/89705 - ICE with reference binding with conversion funct
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89796
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89816
--- Comment #7 from Ville Voutilainen ---
Looks good - I'll do a patch shortly.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89816
--- Comment #6 from Antony Polukhin ---
The fix seems pretty trivial: in function `__variant_construct` get the address
of the sorage before entering the `__do_visit` and make it switch only by the
`__rhs`.
Pseudo-code:
template
void __va
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89817
Bug ID: 89817
Summary: remove references to type modes from user docs for
vector extensions
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89529
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89816
--- Comment #5 from Ville Voutilainen ---
Correct.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89700
--- Comment #6 from Antony Polukhin ---
Another way to workaround the warning is to use something like
`my_class(my_class&) requires false;`. That's too ugly to use.
I'd be fine with closing this issue as a 'won't fix'.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89791
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89816
--- Comment #3 from Ville Voutilainen ---
The problem here is that the older approach knows that it's always from type X1
to type X1, never from type X4 to X2. The visitation approach generates
combinations that we never use.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89463
--- Comment #9 from Qirun Zhang ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #8)
> Patch posted here: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-03/msg01192.html
>
> Some of your bugs might turn out as duplicates if they are fixed by that
> patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89463
--- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 25 Mar 2019, qrzhang at gatech dot edu wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89463
>
> --- Comment #9 from Qirun Zhang ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #8)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53431
--- Comment #38 from Nickolay Kolchin-Semyonov ---
Since this is a long standing problem, maybe this limitation should be
mentioned in official documentation?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62181
--- Comment #17 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #16)
> (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #15)
> > Was this question ever answered?
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-06/msg01337.html
>
> Oh that's inte
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89530
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|wrong-debug |
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener --
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89463
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
Patch posted here: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-03/msg01192.html
Some of your bugs might turn out as duplicates if they are fixed by that patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89816
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62181
--- Comment #16 from Xi Ruoyao ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #15)
> Was this question ever answered?
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-06/msg01337.html
Oh that's intentional.
This would make this warning more useful, whi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89528
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89816
Ville Voutilainen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ville.voutilainen at gmail dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89789
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Mar 25 13:53:50 2019
New Revision: 269917
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269917&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-03-25 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/89789
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89789
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89816
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ville at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89816
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Target Milestone|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89653
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Moritz Kreutzer from comment #7)
> Thanks for taking this up Richard! I just want to check back: Do you need
> any assistance with testing or more information from my side?
Not at this point -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89816
Bug ID: 89816
Summary: [9 Regression] std::variant move construction
regressed since GCC 8.3
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53431
--- Comment #37 from Jonathan Wakely ---
From PR 89806:
Sample code:
#pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wdate-time"
const char* g_test = "dirty-" __DATE__;
When compiling with g++ (g++ -Werror=date-time) this produces:
:2:31: error: macro "__DA
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53431
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nbkolchin at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89806
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62181
--- Comment #15 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Was this question ever answered?
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-06/msg01337.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89808
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||easyhack
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89653
--- Comment #7 from Moritz Kreutzer ---
Thanks for taking this up Richard! I just want to check back: Do you need any
assistance with testing or more information from my side?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89808
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to sduguay from comment #3)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> > Testcase:
> >
> > #pragma once
> > int main() {}
> >
> > > g++ t.C -S
> > t.C:1:9: warning: #pragma once in main fil
a-hardfloat
Thread model: posix
gcc version 9.0.1 20190325 (experimental) (GCC)
The .ira dump has:
...
(insn 55 24 32 2 (set (reg:QI 145 [143])
(const_int -1 [0x])) "testcase.c":10:7 191
{*arm_movqi_insn}
(nil))
...
(insn 58 43 47 2 (set (reg:QI 143)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89779
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Mar 25 12:18:38 2019
New Revision: 269914
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269914&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-03-25 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/89779
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89802
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Mar 25 12:15:59 2019
New Revision: 269913
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269913&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-03-25 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/89802
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89802
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89802
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60702
--- Comment #18 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Should be fixed on the trunk now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60702
--- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Mar 25 11:53:56 2019
New Revision: 269912
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269912&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/60702
* g++.dg/tls/thread_local11.C: Remove scan-t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79540
--- Comment #24 from John David Anglin ---
Author: danglin
Date: Mon Mar 25 11:48:36 2019
New Revision: 269911
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269911&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libgfortran/79540
* io/write_float.def (build_fl
1 - 100 of 137 matches
Mail list logo
