https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115221
--- Comment #7 from Sam James ---
btw, note that toralf hit this on the last snapshot -> it's
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115221
--- Comment #6 from Sam James ---
No - do you want me to? I can, but I don't have a cache of 15 packages
available, so it might be an hour or two. Just let me know.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115221
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amacleod at redhat dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114999
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
```
inline int func0(int y){
return -~y;
}
int func2(int y){
return (~y)/(-(~y));
}
int func2a(int y){
return (~y)/func0(y);
}
int func1(int y){
return (~y)/(y+1);
}
```
What is interesting
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115224
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115224
Bug ID: 115224
Summary: (a ^ 1) & (a ^ ~1) is not optimized to 0 at the
gimplelevel
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimizatio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114867
Nathaniel Shead changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115182
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-05-25
Status|UNCO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115144
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|testsuite-fail |
--- Comment #11 from Hans-Peter N
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114999
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
`~a` and `a + 1` are also negative of each other too:
```
int f(int a, int b)
{
int t = ~a;
int t1 = -t;
return t1 == t;
}
int f1(int a)
{
return (~a) == (-~a);
}
int f2(int a)
{
return (a) ==
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115223
Bug ID: 115223
Summary: [15 regression] ICE when building KDE kontrast with
LTO (error: ‘TYPE_CANONICAL’ has different
‘TYPE_CANONICAL’)
Product: gcc
Version: un
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115222
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Hmm, my reduced testcase has slightly different behavior compared to the
original one for some versions of GCC. The original testcase is partly related
to PR 114844 while my reduced testcase is just missing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115222
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
C++14 (and C++11) had slightly different wording here:
```
Given a member function f of some class X, where f is an inheriting constructor
(12.9) or an implicitlydeclared special member function, the set of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115208
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |blocker
--- Comment #4 from Sam James ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115222
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115220
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115222
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
here is a much reduced testcase:
```
struct A {
~A() noexcept(false);
};
union _Storage {
A _M_value;
~_Storage();
};
static_assert(noexcept(_Storage{}));
```
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115222
Bug ID: 115222
Summary: clang does not think libstdc++'s std::optional is
nothrow destructible
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103524
Bug 103524 depends on bug 107401, which changed state.
Bug 107401 Summary: [c++ modules] ICE in get_originating_module_decl, at
cp/module.cc:18587
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107401
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107401
Nathaniel Shead changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nshead at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115221
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115221
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
This one still ICEs and it is closer to the original source:
```
typedef unsigned uint32_t;
int cde40_t;
int offset;
void aal_test_bit();
uint32_t cde40_key_pol();
long cde40_offset_check(uint32_t pos) {
c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103524
Bug 103524 depends on bug 102345, which changed state.
Bug 102345 Summary: [modules] Cannot define a module interface unit for
anything in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102345
What|Removed |Add
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102345
Nathaniel Shead changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102345
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathaniel Shead :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:28b508233a12c13295f960a2cb8a4864879acfb4
commit r15-830-g28b508233a12c13295f960a2cb8a4864879acfb4
Author: Nathaniel Shead
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115221
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
```
typedef unsigned uint32_t;
int cde40_t;
void aal_test_bit();
uint32_t cde40_key_pol();
long cde40_offset_check(uint32_t pos) {
cde40_key_pol();
if (cde40_t)
return pos ?: 0 % 0;
}
void cde40_check_st
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115220
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Edwin Lu from comment #3)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> > Can you provide the preprocessed source?
>
> I attached the -freport-bug output. Please lmk if you need anything else
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115220
--- Comment #3 from Edwin Lu ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Can you provide the preprocessed source?
I attached the -freport-bug output. Please lmk if you need anything else!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115220
--- Comment #2 from Edwin Lu ---
Created attachment 58283
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58283&action=edit
-freport-bug output
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115221
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
Reducing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115221
Bug ID: 115221
Summary: [15 regression] ICE when building reiser4progs
(propagate_updated_value, at
gimple-range-cache.cc:1368)
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115219
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Barnabás Pőcze from comment #3)
> That reduced test case compiles fine for me. On CE, too. Am I missing some
> compilation flags?
Oh I reduced it with an older version but newer versions (GCC 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115220
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115219
--- Comment #3 from Barnabás Pőcze ---
That reduced test case compiles fine for me. On CE, too. Am I missing some
compilation flags?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115220
Bug ID: 115220
Summary: [15] RISC-V: newlib targets ICE during sink pass
triggered in verify_ssa
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115219
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.5
Summary|[c++17+] ICE on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115219
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115219
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE on conditionally|[c++17+] ICE on depdendent
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115219
Bug ID: 115219
Summary: ICE on conditionally noexcept class operator delete
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115161
--- Comment #22 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
(In reply to Sergei Trofimovich from comment #21)
gcc generates the following code for this C code:
> int main() {
> const __m128i su = _mm_set1_epi32(0x4f80);
> const __m128 sf = _mm_castsi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103368
--- Comment #9 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to paul.richard.tho...@gmail.com from comment #8)
> I simply copied all the associated functions in trans-expr.cc from mainline
> and plonked them in 13-branch. That's why I said that I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93635
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9561cf550a66a89e7c8d31202a03c4fddf82a3f2
commit r15-828-g9561cf550a66a89e7c8d31202a03c4fddf82a3f2
Author: Harald Anlauf
Date: Thu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86100
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:93765736815a049e14d985b758a213cfe60c1e1c
commit r15-827-g93765736815a049e14d985b758a213cfe60c1e1c
Author: Harald Anlauf
Date: Mon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114841
--- Comment #2 from Matheus Izvekov ---
I published
https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2024/p3310r0.html
to address this problem, it has the most up-to-date wording.
FYI the inconsistent deduction examples from problem #1 crash
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111529
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101603
Bug 101603 depends on bug 113598, which changed state.
Bug 113598 Summary: [11/12/13 Regression] GCC internal compiler error since
r0-124275
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113598
What|Removed |Ad
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113598
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111529
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Jason Merrill
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a644775c363979bc25951532819ffa0f244b82f4
commit r11-11448-ga644775c363979bc25951532819ffa0f244b82f4
Author: Jason Merrill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113598
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Jason Merrill
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:38de942670ad39c60ba4feae893d11843e0aebe8
commit r11-11449-g38de942670ad39c60ba4feae893d11843e0aebe8
Author: Jason Merrill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100667
--- Comment #16 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Jason Merrill
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:16046a075cb54c90609825e30b2ab45a03395ca1
commit r11-11447-g16046a075cb54c90609825e30b2ab45a03395ca1
Author: Jason Merrill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115218
Bug ID: 115218
Summary: The conversion constructor of concat_view::iterator
always default-constructs variant
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115217
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note aarch64's TImode is always allocated in starting in even number registers
(starting in GCC 9:
https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/20181002161915.18843-10-richard.hender...@linaro.org/
) .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100667
--- Comment #15 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Jason Merrill
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ba57a52dbf6a64ba66f72c20064c5c0e8cc9dbbb
commit r12-10470-gba57a52dbf6a64ba66f72c20064c5c0e8cc9dbbb
Author: Jason Merrill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115217
Bug ID: 115217
Summary: Register pairs can't be encoded in RISC-V inline asm
blocks
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115187
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104318
Nathaniel Shead changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nshead at gcc dot gnu.org
Res
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103524
Bug 103524 depends on bug 104318, which changed state.
Bug 104318 Summary: [modules] ICE tsubst_copy, at cp/pt.c:16621
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104318
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115187
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Jason Merrill
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9031c027827bff44e1b55c366fc7034c43501b4c
commit r14-10242-g9031c027827bff44e1b55c366fc7034c43501b4c
Author: Jason Merrill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114831
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Uecker :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9f1798c1a93257526196a3c19828e40fb28ac551
commit r15-825-g9f1798c1a93257526196a3c19828e40fb28ac551
Author: Martin Uecker
Date: Sa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=06
Simon Martin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Assignee|unassigned at gcc d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114683
Nathaniel Shead changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-05-24
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103524
Bug 103524 depends on bug 114868, which changed state.
Bug 114868 Summary: [modules] func declared in GMF and exported via using-decl
in module partition is not actually exported
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114868
Wh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114868
Nathaniel Shead changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114868
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Nathaniel Shead
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:782ad2033ea0709a25ef3e899cbb9491406146d5
commit r14-10241-g782ad2033ea0709a25ef3e899cbb9491406146d5
Author: Nathaniel Sh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115216
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
MSVC and ICC (EDG in GCC compat mode) also rejects the code for the same reason
as GCC. Are you sure this is not a clang issue?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115216
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 58281
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58281&action=edit
testcase
Next time please attach the testcase or place it inline rather than just a link
to godbolt.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115216
Bug ID: 115216
Summary: operator auto() gets instantiatied too eagerly
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103524
Bug 103524 depends on bug 114275, which changed state.
Bug 114275 Summary: using std::thread within a templated function in a module
fails to compile
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114275
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105320
Nathaniel Shead changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103524
Bug 103524 depends on bug 105320, which changed state.
Bug 105320 Summary: Use of shared_ptr within a type exported from a module
results in spurious compiler error
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105320
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114275
Nathaniel Shead changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105320
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Nathaniel Shead
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:fd6fd88b1a93f4fb38f095688255ab5c00122810
commit r14-10240-gfd6fd88b1a93f4fb38f095688255ab5c00122810
Author: Nathaniel Sh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114275
--- Comment #11 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Nathaniel Shead
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:fd6fd88b1a93f4fb38f095688255ab5c00122810
commit r14-10240-gfd6fd88b1a93f4fb38f095688255ab5c00122810
Author: Nathaniel S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103524
Bug 103524 depends on bug 115200, which changed state.
Bug 115200 Summary: [modules] ICE in declare_module() with unclosed namespace
scope before module perview
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115200
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115200
Nathaniel Shead changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115200
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathaniel Shead :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:dae606a11eb99814e452b49241fa76f7678f53b8
commit r15-824-gdae606a11eb99814e452b49241fa76f7678f53b8
Author: Nathaniel Shead
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115208
--- Comment #3 from Rainer Orth ---
An i686-pc-linux-gnu reghunt just completed, looking for the rust OOM failures
reported in PR bootstrap/115213. This patch is the culprit:
commit fae5e6a4dfcf9270cd09c2240480860b09c2c627
Author: Andrew MacLeo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115210
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14295
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||user202729 at protonmail dot
com
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115210
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114561
--- Comment #11 from Liam Jackson ---
Thank-you all for narrowing down and fixing this issue, and back-porting the
fix to older compilers. It is much appreciated.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114562
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114561
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114561
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Jason Merrill
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b35afe75674ff9f79cf9685d099bc80f10442216
commit r11-11446-gb35afe75674ff9f79cf9685d099bc80f10442216
Author: Jason Merrill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114562
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Jason Merrill
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b35afe75674ff9f79cf9685d099bc80f10442216
commit r11-11446-gb35afe75674ff9f79cf9685d099bc80f10442216
Author: Jason Merrill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111529
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Jason Merrill
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:19827831516023f2dff449af0b228b2d60190a28
commit r12-10468-g19827831516023f2dff449af0b228b2d60190a28
Author: Jason Merrill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113598
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Jason Merrill
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:419b5e17eace9b6b985b9853db0dc1a5478375b6
commit r12-10467-g419b5e17eace9b6b985b9853db0dc1a5478375b6
Author: Jason Merrill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114562
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Jason Merrill
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7076c565e22281e193aeafafbf40676426a64b75
commit r12-10466-g7076c565e22281e193aeafafbf40676426a64b75
Author: Jason Merrill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114561
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Jason Merrill
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7076c565e22281e193aeafafbf40676426a64b75
commit r12-10466-g7076c565e22281e193aeafafbf40676426a64b75
Author: Jason Merrill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111529
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Jason Merrill
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:53cdaa755de57e57ba9e787f232adc3cfde88209
commit r13-8799-g53cdaa755de57e57ba9e787f232adc3cfde88209
Author: Jason Merrill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113598
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Jason Merrill
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5f1457841abc2fd8657a52d1371c983ac010f1cc
commit r13-8798-g5f1457841abc2fd8657a52d1371c983ac010f1cc
Author: Jason Merrill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115208
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ro at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115213
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115190
--- Comment #8 from Peter Damianov ---
I have been totally unable to reproduce this outside of MSYS2, with any
compilers I built myself. The "MSYS2 MSYS" shell also doesn't have this
problem.
I can't explain why. I tried investigating, but didn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115215
Bug ID: 115215
Summary: views::concat rejects non-movable references
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: lib
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115214
Bug ID: 115214
Summary: tree-ssa-pre.c(ICE in find_or_generate_expression, at
tree-ssa-pre.c:2780)
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115192
Richard Sandiford changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12/13/14/15 regression] |[11/12/13/14 regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115192
--- Comment #10 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a0fe4fb1c8d7804515845dd5d2a814b3c7a1ccba
commit r15-820-ga0fe4fb1c8d7804515845dd5d2a814b3c7a1ccba
Author: Richard Sandiford
Da
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115211
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
[..]
> Ah! Use -Q --help=optimizers (how intuititve...)
Or when invoking cc1 omit -quiet. remember to put --help=optimziers after
optimization options.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115211
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #2)
> > --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
> > This was done on purpose, you can use -help=optimizers now I think.
>
> The thread I cited rather
1 - 100 of 121 matches
Mail list logo
