https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114603
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:959d6529df206c1983be14383da081f374416e47
commit r13-8977-g959d6529df206c1983be14383da081f374416e47
Author: Richard San
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114607
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:22c6a11686d3f20f8682c2fbe9e33867a7e8af0e
commit r13-8976-g22c6a11686d3f20f8682c2fbe9e33867a7e8af0e
Author: Richard San
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113042
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|popcount of 8bits and |popcount of 128bits can be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113042
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:fcc3af9949880476c4ed01a98bd7f5d7f29b7b16
commit r15-2946-gfcc3af9949880476c4ed01a98bd7f5d7f29b7b16
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date: Mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115464
Richard Sandiford changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115464
--- Comment #17 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:86dacfb06b90371458d58872f461d358a0834305
commit r14-10590-g86dacfb06b90371458d58872f461d358a0834305
Author: Richard S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115464
--- Comment #16 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:32b21292adb6ad6b5e1d60d923a773e4d0daca7b
commit r14-10589-g32b21292adb6ad6b5e1d60d923a773e4d0daca7b
Author: Richard S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #170 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #168)
> I am getting a segmentation fault when building libgcc2.c now:
> (...)
> Trying with gcc-15 now.
gcc-15 from July segfaults the same
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113035
--- Comment #4 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Thanks! It actually looks like there's two vsetvls in both output files. But
in the case of the sifive-7 tuning, the two vsetvls set different vector
configurations.
for sifive-7 we have these:
vsetvli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116174
Hongtao Liu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115749
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115756
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116174
--- Comment #11 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by hongtao Liu
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4e7735a8d87559bbddfe3a985786996e22241f8d
commit r14-10588-g4e7735a8d87559bbddfe3a985786996e22241f8d
Author: liuhongt
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114171
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|13.3|11.5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116362
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116362
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Hans-Peter Nilsson :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1b8b53ef75c143cddc114705c97c74d9c8f7a64b
commit r15-2945-g1b8b53ef75c143cddc114705c97c74d9c8f7a64b
Author: Hans-Peter Nilsson
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116387
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115857
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
unsigned hammWeight(unsigned char a)
{
a = ((a & 0xAA) >> 1) + (a & 0x55);
a = ((a & 0xCC) >> 2) + (a & 0x33);
a = ((a & 0xF0) >> 4) + (a & 0x0F);
return a;
}
Could be optimized to just POPCOUNT(a) if you h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116275
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Roger Sayle :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b6fb4f7f651d2aa89548c5833fe2679af2638df5
commit r15-2940-gb6fb4f7f651d2aa89548c5833fe2679af2638df5
Author: Roger Sayle
Date: Thu A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115917
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
Pa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116387
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0f8b11968472ff12674d67fd856610646b373bd0
commit r15-2939-g0f8b11968472ff12674d67fd856610646b373bd0
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114146
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |anlauf at gcc dot
gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99837
--- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The following variation (valid code) which compiles here with 14-branch
fails at r15-2937:
program p
type t
!integer, allocatable :: a(:)
integer :: b
end type
class(t), allocatable
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115583
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:580fe7979f3c873eae885568d2c17c9e110670b4
commit r15-2938-g580fe7979f3c873eae885568d2c17c9e110670b4
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59922
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pierrick.bouvier at posteo dot
net
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116386
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59922
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #3)
> Confirmed. Happens with optimization levels -O0 and -Os, but not -O1, -O2,
> -O3, -Og, or -Ofast.
That is because of the way finally is expanded. With -O0 and -O
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116386
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||59922
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116386
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|false-positive |[12/13/14/15 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116378
Gaius Mulley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #58931|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116387
--- Comment #2 from Andre Vehreschild ---
I don't get why this was not detected during my bootstrap.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116378
--- Comment #8 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #7)
> For glibc (even though the Linux kernel might have a different mode_t idea,
> some targets are unsigned short, e.g. arm-linux-eabi) is always:
> #define __MODE_T_T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116387
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vehre at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116387
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116387
Bug ID: 116387
Summary: [15 Regression] Broken bootstrap in fortran/resolve.cc
since r15-2934
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116386
Bug ID: 116386
Summary: false-positive -Werror=return-type when compiling with
-fsanitize=thread
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116380
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Might be slightly easier to understand testcase:
```
int a[3], d[3], c;
int f(int e, int b) {
for (; e < 3; e++) {
a[0] = 0;
if (b)
c = b;
d[e] = 0;
a[e] = 0;
}
return e;
}
```
An
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116385
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
In fact I see no RID_TYPEID cp_unevaluated so that's probably the problem.
Even C++11 said "The expression is an unevaluated operand."
Probably a dup of bug 68604.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116383
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Severity|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116385
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113939
Bug 113939 depends on bug 116236, which changed state.
Bug 116236 Summary: [LRA] [M68K] ICE insn does not satisfy its constraints
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116236
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116236
Richard Sandiford changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116343
Richard Sandiford changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116378
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
For glibc (even though the Linux kernel might have a different mode_t idea,
some targets are unsigned short, e.g. arm-linux-eabi) is always:
#define __MODE_T_TYPE __U32_TYPE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116236
--- Comment #23 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3673b7054ec268c445620b9c52d25e65bc9a7f96
commit r15-2937-g3673b7054ec268c445620b9c52d25e65bc9a7f96
Author: Richard Sandiford
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116343
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:70ae0daeb76f28a3135f4a74d6e440fb1d9821fa
commit r15-2936-g70ae0daeb76f28a3135f4a74d6e440fb1d9821fa
Author: Richard Sandiford
Da
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116385
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> MSVC rejects the default argument usage:
>
> (8): error C2587: 'n': illegal use of local variable as default
> parameter
> (3): note: see declaration of 'n'
> (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116385
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
MSVC rejects the default argument usage:
(8): error C2587: 'n': illegal use of local variable as default
parameter
(3): note: see declaration of 'n'
(9): error C2587: 'n': illegal use of local variable as d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116385
Bug ID: 116385
Summary: Unevaluated usage of function parameters with typeid
incorrectly considered odr-use
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Seve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116384
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
I think the fix is just:
--- a/gcc/cp/pt.cc
+++ b/gcc/cp/pt.cc
@@ -20217,6 +20217,8 @@ tsubst_expr (tree t, tree args, tsubst_flags_t
complain, tree in_decl)
case IMPLICIT_CONV_EXPR:
{
tree
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110033
Andre Vehreschild changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87477
Bug 87477 depends on bug 110033, which changed state.
Bug 110033 Summary: rejects-valid: associate name corresponding to coarray
selector should be considered a coarray
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110033
What|Remo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116384
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110033
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Andre Vehreschild :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:dbf4c574b92bc692a0380a2b5ee25028321e735f
commit r15-2935-gdbf4c574b92bc692a0380a2b5ee25028321e735f
Author: Andre Vehreschild
D
ttached test file generates an ICE on gcc-14 and in the latest
git commit (20240815). The code was reduced from a giant pile of template
metaprogramming in a codebase I work on. It works with gcc-13. Passing
-std=c++11 or -std=c++14 is required - it does not ICE with with c++17.
I bisected the issue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110033
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Andre Vehreschild :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a3f1cdd8ed46f9816b31ab162ae4dac547d34ebc
commit r15-2934-ga3f1cdd8ed46f9816b31ab162ae4dac547d34ebc
Author: Andre Vehreschild
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116378
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
I am pretty sure it should just use int always rather than mode_t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116378
--- Comment #5 from Iain Sandoe ---
Perhaps there's a need for some target-specific code?
I see entries for Glibc - but nothing for 'posix' or 'windows' - so is the
Glibc code supposed to be generic?
-
In file included from /src-local/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116374
--- Comment #6 from Andreas Schwab ---
With that combined, all of gcc.c-torture runs successfully (except for one test
that is not a regression).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115550
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115550
Bug 115550 depends on bug 104981, which changed state.
Bug 104981 Summary: [coroutines] Internal compiler error when promise object's
constructor takes a base class of the object parameter
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104981
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104981
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116327
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115550
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:63c51e09d160a44fdce1199e8efe9d293f773a2c
commit r14-10586-g63c51e09d160a44fdce1199e8efe9d293f773a2c
Author: Patrick Palka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116327
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:63c51e09d160a44fdce1199e8efe9d293f773a2c
commit r14-10586-g63c51e09d160a44fdce1199e8efe9d293f773a2c
Author: Patrick Palka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104981
--- Comment #11 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:63c51e09d160a44fdce1199e8efe9d293f773a2c
commit r14-10586-g63c51e09d160a44fdce1199e8efe9d293f773a2c
Author: Patrick Palka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116380
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.5
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116320
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:484f139ccd3b631a777802e810a632678b42ffab
commit r15-2933-g484f139ccd3b631a777802e810a632678b42ffab
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104981
--- Comment #10 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:303bed670af962c01b77a4f0c51de97f70e8167e
commit r15-2932-g303bed670af962c01b77a4f0c51de97f70e8167e
Author: Patrick Palka
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116327
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:303bed670af962c01b77a4f0c51de97f70e8167e
commit r15-2932-g303bed670af962c01b77a4f0c51de97f70e8167e
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115550
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:303bed670af962c01b77a4f0c51de97f70e8167e
commit r15-2932-g303bed670af962c01b77a4f0c51de97f70e8167e
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116374
--- Comment #5 from Michael Matz ---
Little by little... So, there's a special case in eliminate_regs_in_insn
for a simple regset from a reg+cst source. That special case isn't doing
quite the same as the generic elimination code in lra_elimin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66262
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #18 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116383
Bug ID: 116383
Summary: Value from __atomic_store not forwarded to non-atomic
load at same address
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116236
--- Comment #22 from Richard Sandiford ---
(In reply to Michael Matz from comment #21)
> (In reply to Richard Sandiford from comment #17)
> > > But if LRA needs to be extended for correctness, then, ... meh.
> > But this is how it's always worke
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116174
--- Comment #10 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Hongtao Liu from comment #9)
> (In reply to Arnd Bergmann from comment #7)
> > I confirmed that the patch from comment #6 addresses the build warnings I
> > see in the kernel.
>
> Does the commit al
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116379
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116374
--- Comment #4 from Andreas Schwab ---
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/sprintf.c execution, -O0
Dump of assembler code for function sprintf:
0x885c <+0>: linkw %fp,#-8
=> 0x8860 <+4>: lea %fp@(17),%a0
0x8864 <+8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116379
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77871
Andre Vehreschild changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
--- Comment #15 from Andre V
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116236
--- Comment #21 from Michael Matz ---
(In reply to Richard Sandiford from comment #17)
> > But if LRA needs to be extended for correctness, then, ... meh.
> But this is how it's always worked. The corresponding reload code is in
> find_reloads_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116374
--- Comment #3 from Michael Matz ---
Ah yes, that assert checks that a previously unused elimination entry is still
pristine. It might be that the entries in 'self_elim_table' need similar
treatment, but that would need further testcases to be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116382
Bug ID: 116382
Summary: [modules] Importing NTTP of template type causes
recursive lazy load
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66262
--- Comment #17 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Xi Ruoyao :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ee4a6343225b6e44b3d2b2c90c355c21f7ec6855
commit r15-2931-gee4a6343225b6e44b3d2b2c90c355c21f7ec6855
Author: Xi Ruoyao
Date: Thu Jul 4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98636
Torbjorn SVENSSON changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||azoff at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116274
--- Comment #8 from Hongtao Liu ---
>
> codegen is probably an RA/LRA artifact caused by bad instruction constraints
> and the refuse to reload to a gpr. Not sure if a move high to gpr is a
> thing,
> pextrq would work for sure. But an unpck
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116274
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f7e672da8fc3d416a6d07eb01f3be4400ef94fac
commit r15-2930-gf7e672da8fc3d416a6d07eb01f3be4400ef94fac
Author: liuhongt
Date: Mon Aug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116128
--- Comment #5 from mjr19 at cam dot ac.uk ---
I think in general using partial sums improves accuracy.
If one assumes that all of the data have the same sign and similar magnitude,
then by the time the sum is nearly complete one is adding a sin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116378
Gaius Mulley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from Gaius Mulle
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116378
--- Comment #3 from Gaius Mulley ---
Created attachment 58932
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58932&action=edit
ChangeLog
The ChangeLog for the above patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116378
--- Comment #2 from Gaius Mulley ---
Created attachment 58931
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58931&action=edit
Proposed fix
Here is a proposed fix - it completes the -Wodr warning removal in the m2/C
interface code for the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116381
Bug ID: 116381
Summary: std::variant should not allow array type as an
alternative
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116371
--- Comment #2 from Richard Sandiford ---
Fixed on trunk. I'll wait a bit before backporting.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116371
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cc2d29e5f4434a3fd4e0dd93ea4f9857a0309201
commit r15-2929-gcc2d29e5f4434a3fd4e0dd93ea4f9857a0309201
Author: Richard Sandiford
Da
-bootstrap
--enable-checking=yes --prefix=/local/suz-local/software/local/gcc-trunk
--enable-sanitizers --enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-werror --enable-multilib
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 15.0.0 20240815 (experimental) (GCC)
[517] %
[517] % gcctk -O3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116379
Bug ID: 116379
Summary: Type deduction error on decltype(auto)
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116378
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79328
Rolf Eike Beer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||eb at emlix dot com
--- Comment #5 from
98 matches
Mail list logo
