https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90329
--- Comment #46 from Kaz Kylheku ---
C pseudocode in light of previous comment:
double abused_fortran_fn(double x, double y, char str[1], int len)
{
if (len != 1)
return abused_fortran_fn(x, y, str, 1); /* full call, not tail
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90329
Kaz Kylheku changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kkylheku at gmail dot com
--- Comment #45
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85125
--- Comment #4 from David Stone ---
*** Bug 86623 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004
Bug 55004 depends on bug 86623, which changed state.
Bug 86623 Summary: constexpr evaluation fails to give an error for modifying a
const object
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86623
What|Removed |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86623
David Stone changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85125
David Stone changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||david at doublewise dot net
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90947
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90909
--- Comment #7 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Fri Jun 21 21:58:19 2019
New Revision: 272576
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272576&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-06-21 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/90909
* g++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86535
--- Comment #21 from Curtis Hamilton ---
Created attachment 46510
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46510&action=edit
FreeBSD/X86_64 GCC8 build log
GccGo doesn't build on FreeBSD X86 either. It has similar issues to those I
g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67184
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90909
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90909
--- Comment #5 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Fri Jun 21 20:47:40 2019
New Revision: 272574
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272574&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
/cp
2019-06-21 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/90909
R
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69445
--- Comment #5 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Fri Jun 21 20:47:40 2019
New Revision: 272574
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272574&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
/cp
2019-06-21 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/90909
R
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67184
--- Comment #12 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Fri Jun 21 20:47:40 2019
New Revision: 272574
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272574&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
/cp
2019-06-21 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/90909
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90909
--- Comment #4 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Fri Jun 21 20:46:51 2019
New Revision: 272573
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272573&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
/cp
2019-06-21 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/90909
R
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67184
--- Comment #11 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Fri Jun 21 20:46:51 2019
New Revision: 272573
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272573&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
/cp
2019-06-21 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/90909
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69445
--- Comment #4 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Fri Jun 21 20:46:51 2019
New Revision: 272573
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272573&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
/cp
2019-06-21 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/90909
R
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61490
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Fri Jun 21 20:43:47 2019
New Revision: 272572
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272572&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/61490 - qualified-id in friend function definition.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61490
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60223
--- Comment #8 from Marek Polacek ---
Fixed on trunk but I'll leave it open because I want to fix it for 9.2 also.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51991
--- Comment #17 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #15)
> Compiling the test in comment 10 gives now
>
> pr51991_2.f90:3:7:
>
> 3 | save1 = something wrong
> | 1
> Error: Invalid ch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60223
--- Comment #7 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Fri Jun 21 20:32:06 2019
New Revision: 272571
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272571&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/60223 - ICE with T{} in non-deduced context.
* p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67884
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64235
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Fri Jun 21 20:26:54 2019
New Revision: 272570
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272570&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/64235 - missing syntax error with invalid alignas.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64235
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67884
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Fri Jun 21 20:24:01 2019
New Revision: 272569
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272569&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-06-21 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/67884
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81797
--- Comment #82 from Jens-S. Vöckler ---
I had some prior issues with w.r.t 32bits. Tinkering, this script does build a
gcc 9.1 on macOS 10.14.5 on APFS. I didn't create it for beauty, and it's
specific to my setup. The resulting compiler is unab
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90490
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10 Regression] ICE on|[9 Regression] ICE on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90490
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Fri Jun 21 20:19:24 2019
New Revision: 272568
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272568&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/90490 - fix decltype issues in noexcept-specifier.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90875
Matthew Beliveau changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44209
Bug 44209 depends on bug 90875, which changed state.
Bug 90875 Summary: warnings about switch values outside range don't have
associated option
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90875
What|Removed |A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90875
--- Comment #4 from Matthew Beliveau ---
Author: mbelivea
Date: Fri Jun 21 19:58:32 2019
New Revision: 272567
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272567&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/90875 - added -Wswitch-outside-range option
Added:
trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90813
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #7 from Thomas Koenig -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90937
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90937
--- Comment #9 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Fri Jun 21 19:32:23 2019
New Revision: 272566
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272566&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-06-21 Thomas Koenig
Backport from trunk
PR fort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90937
--- Comment #8 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Fri Jun 21 19:30:51 2019
New Revision: 272565
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272565&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-06-21 Thomas Koenig
Backport from trunk
PR fort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90937
--- Comment #7 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Fri Jun 21 19:28:54 2019
New Revision: 272564
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272564&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-06-21 Thomas Koenig
Backport from trunk
PR fort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90960
--- Comment #2 from Alisdair Meredith ---
I agree the second problem looks like a dupe.
It has since been pointed out to me that the first error is indeed correct, and
simply the error message is less than helpful:
[temp.spec]p8 of C++17 says:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44209
Bug 44209 depends on bug 90875, which changed state.
Bug 90875 Summary: warnings about switch values outside range don't have
associated option
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90875
What|Removed |A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90875
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90920
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90920
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Fixed for 9.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90961
Bug ID: 90961
Summary: awful diagnostics for noexcept-expression with type
name
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priori
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83250
Agner Fog changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||agner at agner dot org
--- Comment #1 from A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51991
--- Comment #16 from Steve Kargl ---
On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 06:03:42PM +, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51991
>
> --- Comment #15 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Compiling the test in comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90731
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
And using typedef:
typedef void T() noexcept(true);
T t;
void t() noexcept(true);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90930
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.0
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90930
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Jun 21 18:12:58 2019
New Revision: 272560
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272560&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-06-21 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/90930
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90731
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
This test using using should compile in c++17:
using T = void() noexcept(true);
T t;
void t() noexcept(true);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51991
--- Comment #15 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Compiling the test in comment 10 gives now
pr51991_2.f90:3:7:
3 | save1 = something wrong
| 1
Error: Invalid character in name at (1)
pr51991_2.f90:8:6:
8 | data1 = somethin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90875
Matthew Beliveau changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44209
Bug 44209 depends on bug 90875, which changed state.
Bug 90875 Summary: warnings about switch values outside range don't have
associated option
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90875
What|Removed |A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90875
--- Comment #1 from Matthew Beliveau ---
Author: mbelivea
Date: Fri Jun 21 17:50:29 2019
New Revision: 272559
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272559&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/90875 - added -Wswitch-outside-range option
* doc/in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90920
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Fri Jun 21 17:37:07 2019
New Revision: 272558
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272558&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/90920 restore previous checks for empty ranges
The change i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90912
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Ondřej Surý from comment #5)
>
> That said, we did this and it has been already fixed in GCC via PR84010.
How so? That PR is for sparc, the patches are against sparc too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78722
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90960
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51991
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51991
--- Comment #13 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Fri Jun 21 16:57:24 2019
New Revision: 272556
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272556&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-06-21 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/51991
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49332
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90883
--- Comment #8 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Oh, yea, I kept looking at this from a DSE lens in which case it's the earlier
store that is partially dead.
But if we're storing the same value, then the latter store is totally dead and
removing the latte
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90949
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10 Regression] null |[9 Regression] null pointer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90949
--- Comment #7 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Fri Jun 21 16:36:00 2019
New Revision: 272555
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272555&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/90949
* tree-ssa-copy.c (fini_copy_pro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90960
Bug ID: 90960
Summary: declaring a member function with a computed typedef is
confused as a data member definition
Product: gcc
Version: 9.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90912
--- Comment #5 from Ondřej Surý ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> Well GCC is producing correct code is GNU LD works with it.
No, not really.
> Report this bug to Sun^wOracle instead.
That said, we did this and it has been alre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90959
Bug ID: 90959
Summary: hash_map can be copied but leads to a double-free
after assignment
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81797
--- Comment #81 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Basically we think there's a bug in the APFS filesystem, nobody can reproduce
it on other systems, none of us have access to such a system. It would be
really helpful if somebody seeing the error could inv
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81797
--- Comment #80 from Jonathan Wakely ---
And the headers in $target/libstdc++-v3/include/bits are now regular files, not
symlinks?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90958
Bug ID: 90958
Summary: Recent versions of GCC raise CONSTRAINT_ERROR at
runtime for iterator loops with nested constrained
records.
Product: gcc
Version: 9.1.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90953
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90953
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Fri Jun 21 14:41:22 2019
New Revision: 272552
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272552&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/90953 - ICE with -Wmissing-format-attribute.
* c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90957
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||lto, wrong-code
--- Comment #1 from Ric
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90930
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90957
Bug ID: 90957
Summary: 453.povray is miscompiled with -flto -static
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: lto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90930
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90914
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work|9.1.0 |10.0
Summary|[9/10 Regressio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90914
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Jun 21 13:56:54 2019
New Revision: 272547
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272547&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-06-21 Richard Biener
PR debug/90914
* dwarf2ou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81797
--- Comment #79 from Damien Merenne ---
not -j1. Only the LN_S trick.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90956
Bug ID: 90956
Summary: Failed on the PRINT
Product: gcc
Version: 5.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90953
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
--- a/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
+++ b/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
@@ -7601,13 +7601,13 @@ check_missing_format_attribute (tree ltype, tree rtype)
tree ra;
for (ra = TYPE_ATTRIBUTES (ttr); ra; ra = TREE_CHAIN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90953
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
Test-case:
$ cat jit.ii
namespace std {
union [[gnu::may_alias]] _Any_data{};
enum _Manager_operation { __get_type_info };
template class A;
class B {
typedef bool (*_Manager_type)(_Any_data, const _Any_da
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90953
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90955
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90914
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P2
Target Milestone|10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90955
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Yes this is one of the most obvious violations of aliasing rules. Note the
strict alias warnings in recent versions been removed as they providing too
many false positives.
Use either -fno-strict-aliasing o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87820
--- Comment #1 from ExtComm.CODA at dlr dot de ---
clang and intel-compiler don't fail
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55101
--- Comment #1 from ExtComm.CODA at dlr dot de ---
g++ (GCC) 7.3.0: fails too
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90914
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Similar to unused type pruning we have to preserve externs local to functions
since they'll be regenerated otherwise.
Index: gcc/dwarf2out.c
=
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90955
Bug ID: 90955
Summary: Wrong optimization: erroneous sum of compile-time
constants
Product: gcc
Version: 9.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639
Bug 24639 depends on bug 89296, which changed state.
Bug 89296 Summary: [7 Regression] tree copy-header masking uninitialized warning
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89296
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89296
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|ASSIGNED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90883
--- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 18 Jun 2019, law at redhat dot com wrote:
> slow ()
> {
> struct C D.25898;
> struct C D.29462;
>
> ;; basic block 2, loop depth 0, count 1073741824 (estimated locally), maybe
> hot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88784
--- Comment #28 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 18 Jun 2019, helijia at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88784
>
> --- Comment #27 from Li Jia He ---
> Created attachment 46495
> --> https://gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90913
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90954
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
Confirmed, it's old, starting with GCC 4.9.0 where -fsanitize=undefined was
added. Can you please Jakub take a look?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26163
Bug 26163 depends on bug 90913, which changed state.
Bug 90913 Summary: [10 Regression] ICE in maybe_gen_insn, at optabs.c:7341
since r272239
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90913
What|Removed |Add
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90951
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90953
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90913
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Jun 21 11:10:39 2019
New Revision: 272545
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272545&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-06-21 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/90913
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81797
--- Comment #78 from Jonathan Wakely ---
And is that using LN_S="cp -pR" ? And -j1 ?
1 - 100 of 104 matches
Mail list logo
