https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117042
Bug ID: 117042
Summary: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault in
tsubst(tree_node*, tree_node*, int, tree_node*)
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89786
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|ebotcazou at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113036
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113036
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|14.0|14.2.1
Summary|assertion fai
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117018
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ebotcazou at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117041
Bug ID: 117041
Summary: ICE on valid code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu: in
vectorizable_load, at tree-vect-stmts.cc:10327
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117018
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116997
--- Comment #6 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus
---
I gave it a try on s390 and I also end up with
MEM [(void *)Ptr.0_1] = { 7, 6291456 };
Thanks for the very fast fix :)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117016
--- Comment #5 from Matthias Kretz (Vir) ---
Wrt. working on a larger data set you might be interested in:
https://github.com/mattkretz/vir-simd?tab=readme-ov-file#simd-execution-policy-p0350
For the problem you seem to describe, I like to have
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117040
Bug ID: 117040
Summary: g++ crashed for __alignof and got internal compiler
error: in poplevel, at cp/decl.cc:643
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117039
Bug ID: 117039
Summary: [15 Regression] Build failure:
libcpp/directives.cc:2078:34: error: unknown
conversion type character '>' in format
[-Werror=format=]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96945
dennis luehring changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dl.soluz at gmx dot net
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58483
--- Comment #18 from dennis luehring ---
rechecked it with godbolt gcc-trunk and 14.2
gcc still does not optimize the std::vector case
clang is doing the optimization for at least 11 years
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117038
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117038
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
r15-4141-g7e09f16ef98088
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80881
--- Comment #35 from Julian Waters ---
Created attachment 59300
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59300&action=edit
gcc 14 version, broken
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117038
Bug ID: 117038
Summary: [15 regression] Ada bootstrap fails with LTO errors
(fe.h:361:23: error: type of ‘sinput__c_source_buffer’
does not match original declaration
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80881
--- Comment #34 from Julian Waters ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #32)
> > It's a bit of a shame I couldn't figure out how to make the zero extend
> > approach work correctly. That aside, I'm concerned that this patch still
> > isn't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117037
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c++ |middle-end
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117037
Bug ID: 117037
Summary: gcc14.2.1 riscv64-unknown-linux-gnu-g++ build opencv
5.x error
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117036
Bug ID: 117036
Summary: [SH] add __builtin_sh_fsca, __builtin_sh_fsrra
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116883
--- Comment #4 from Huaqi ---
(In reply to Li Pan from comment #3)
> I think xuli is working on this issue. As you know, the first week of Oct is
> the National Holiday.
Ok, thanks, just confirm this issue is acked.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116883
--- Comment #3 from Li Pan ---
I think xuli is working on this issue. As you know, the first week of Oct is
the National Holiday.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116883
--- Comment #2 from Huaqi ---
Hi there, I tested with godbolt.org with latest gcc15(trunk), this issue still
exists, and gcc14.2 still fail.
/opt/compiler-explorer/riscv32/gcc-trunk-20241008/riscv32-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/gcc/riscv32-unknown
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117035
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|NEW
Resolution|DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117035
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101670
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||guyutongxue at 163 dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117035
Bug ID: 117035
Summary: ICE in unify, at cp/pt.cc:25410, when specifying
lambda expression template argument in partial
specialization
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89808
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44209
Bug 44209 depends on bug 89808, which changed state.
Bug 89808 Summary: An option to disable warning "#pragma once in main file"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89808
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89808
Ken Matsui changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89808
--- Comment #16 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Ken Matsui :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:821d56100e1110ab6a166f50819522254eb30923
commit r15-4191-g821d56100e1110ab6a166f50819522254eb30923
Author: Ken Matsui
Date: Fri Mar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85316
Bug 85316 depends on bug 116024, which changed state.
Bug 116024 Summary: [14/15 Regression] unnecessary integer comparison(s) for a
simple loop since r14-5628-g53ba8d669550d3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116024
What
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116024
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116024
--- Comment #12 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:52fdf1e7eb89a148a9cdd1daade524f4540ab5fa
commit r15-4189-g52fdf1e7eb89a148a9cdd1daade524f4540ab5fa
Author: Artemiy Volkov
Date: Tue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116024
--- Comment #11 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e5f5cffb8c8243896a9d3bd0e2b8f14c70f8df1e
commit r15-4188-ge5f5cffb8c8243896a9d3bd0e2b8f14c70f8df1e
Author: Artemiy Volkov
Date: Tue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116024
--- Comment #10 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:65b33d43d29b148e127b1ba997f1bbc2c7028b94
commit r15-4187-g65b33d43d29b148e127b1ba997f1bbc2c7028b94
Author: Artemiy Volkov
Date: Tue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116024
--- Comment #9 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0883c88664d48463dfc79335dccaf15a69230952
commit r15-4186-g0883c88664d48463dfc79335dccaf15a69230952
Author: Artemiy Volkov
Date: Tue O
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116976
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Adding something like this to _Bit_iterator (and _Bit_const_iterator) allows
calling flip():
struct _Pointer
{
reference _M_ref;
const _Pointer* operator->() const { return this; }
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117011
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117033
--- Comment #8 from Davide Italiano ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #7)
> (In reply to Davide Italiano from comment #6)
> > I noticed you linked the LLVM bug I found.
> > As part of my search/analysis, I found out there are cases th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117034
--- Comment #4 from eczbek.void at gmail dot com ---
Whoops.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117034
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to eczbek.void from comment #2)
> Is this error related?
Yes but you filed PR 116952 which is that issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117033
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Davide Italiano from comment #6)
> I noticed you linked the LLVM bug I found.
> As part of my search/analysis, I found out there are cases that sometimes
> clang gets but GCC doesn't (unsurpris
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117034
--- Comment #2 from eczbek.void at gmail dot com ---
Is this error related?
```
template
concept A = true;
template T>
void foo(T) {}
```
Compiler Explorer link: https://godbolt.org/z/dfKaW8dxa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117033
--- Comment #6 from Davide Italiano ---
I noticed you linked the LLVM bug I found.
As part of my search/analysis, I found out there are cases that sometimes clang
gets but GCC doesn't (unsurprisingly, FWIW).
Here's a simple one.
https://godbol
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117034
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117032
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
specs.
COLLECT_GCC=/opt/compiler-explorer/gcc-snapshot/bin/g++
Target: x86_64-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc-trunk-20241008/configure
--prefix=/opt/compiler-explorer/gcc-build/staging
--enable-libstdcxx-backtrace=yes --build=x86_64-linux-gnu
--host=x86_64-linux-gnu --target=x86_64-linux-gnu --d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115376
--- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou ---
Great, thanks for checking!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117033
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117033
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|GCC trunk emits larger code |GCC trunk emits larger code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117033
--- Comment #3 from Davide Italiano ---
(In reply to Davide Italiano from comment #2)
> Sorry, modified the title. This is `-Oz`, not `-Os`
Writing this because you mentioned it blocks `-Os`, fwiw.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117033
Davide Italiano changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|103916 |
Summary|GCC trunk emits l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117033
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |tree-optimization
Severity|no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117033
Bug ID: 117033
Summary: GCC trunk emits larger code at -Oz compared to -O2
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117031
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
So on the V4HI to V4DF missed vectorization, I filed PR 117032 since GCC does
understand if there is an indirection via V4SI.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101956
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117032
Bug ID: 117032
Summary: missing vectorization of V4HI to V4DF
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117031
Bug ID: 117031
Summary: increasing VF during SLP vectorization permutes
unnecessarily
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimizat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117012
--- Comment #6 from Tamar Christina ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> But it is still only a GCC 15 regression.
>
> GCC 14 produced:
> ```
> cmltv0.16b, v0.16b, #0
> adrpx0, .LC0
> ldr q31, [x
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115376
Pascal Pignard changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117007
--- Comment #3 from Steven Munroe ---
I tested the attached example source on GCC 14.0.1 from Ubuntu on powerpc64le.
Seeing the same results. So add GCC 14.0.1 to this list. Actually the last GCC
version that did not have this bug was GCC 7. Lo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117012
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Roger Sayle from comment #4)
> The patch for PR target/114428 incorrectly uses CONST_VECTOR_DUPLICATE_P,
> which has slightly different semantics to what the author intended. Instead
> the func
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117028
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117019
--- Comment #1 from Joseph S. Myers ---
Note that a switch declaration can have VM type without violating the rule
about switch not being allowed to jump over a declaration with VM type (the
previous rule was that the entire switch statement had
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117030
--- Comment #1 from Joseph S. Myers ---
Note that what was accepted omitted the [[unsequenced]] attributes (with a view
to having them added back in a later, separate paper), but that's probably not
relevant for the built-in functions.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117030
Bug ID: 117030
Summary: [C2y] Implement N3367, More Modern Bit Utilities
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117022
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-10-08
Assignee|unassigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117029
Bug ID: 117029
Summary: [C2y] Implement N3298, Introduce complex literals
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117028
--- Comment #1 from Joseph S. Myers ---
My strong inclination is *not* to add any obsolescence diagnostics, just
support the new features (which should already be present for C++) for C23.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117028
Bug ID: 117028
Summary: [C2y] Implement N3353, Obsolete implicitly octal
literals and add delimited escape sequences
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117024
--- Comment #1 from Joseph S. Myers ---
For GCC, this means built-in functions (this is also a library feature).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114816
--- Comment #2 from Joseph S. Myers ---
N3344 alternative 1 was accepted for C2Y. So we should make all these
questionable cases hard errors (no need for conditionals on standard version
since they were previously implicitly undefined behavior).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117027
Joseph S. Myers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117026
Joseph S. Myers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117027
Bug ID: 117027
Summary: [C2y] Implement N3286, Floating-point exceptions for
macro replacements
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117025
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||alx at kernel dot org
--- Comment #1 from S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117026
Bug ID: 117026
Summary: [C2y] Implement N3275, fopen_s "p" and bring fopen_s’s
mode closer to POSIX 202x
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Seve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117025
Bug ID: 117025
Summary: [C2y] Implement N3369, New _Lengthof()
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117023
--- Comment #1 from Joseph S. Myers ---
It's not clear what "implement" means here. See the thread
https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc/375c5f62-dad4-4247-958c-57b230ae6...@oracle.com/T/#t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117024
Bug ID: 117024
Summary: [C2y] Implement N3349, Abs Without Undefined Behavior
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117012
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117023
Bug ID: 117023
Summary: [C2y] Implement N3322, Allow zero length operations on
null pointers
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117022
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
There is a request for a do-while example to be added editorially.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117022
Bug ID: 117022
Summary: [C2y] Implement N3355, Named loops
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117020
--- Comment #2 from Joseph S. Myers ---
There is very little language content in this paper (only some predefined
macros).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117021
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117020
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117021
Bug ID: 117021
Summary: [C2y] Implement N3370, Case range expressions
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117020
Bug ID: 117020
Summary: [C2y] Implement N3366, Restartable Functions for
Efficient Character Conversions
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Seve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117019
Bug ID: 117019
Summary: [C2y] Implement N3356, if declarations
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117019
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
L
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80881
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #59295|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80881
--- Comment #32 from Eric Botcazou ---
> It's a bit of a shame I couldn't figure out how to make the zero extend
> approach work correctly. That aside, I'm concerned that this patch still
> isn't correct, because it doesn't seem to be using the p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117011
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
The cost is not the place where it matters the most really. It is more about
the RTL patterns in the .md file. it might be better to move over to insn_cost
rather than rtx_cost due to that ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116190
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.4
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116190
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a998902576db03a178fe21aa46ed38647f112a98
commit r13-9097-ga998902576db03a178fe21aa46ed38647f112a98
Author: Eric Botcazou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116190
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Eric Botcazou
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:70c46d8e455144cf5968d38b932692cbe0cfa2e1
commit r14-10759-g70c46d8e455144cf5968d38b932692cbe0cfa2e1
Author: Eric Botcazou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114640
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.4
1 - 100 of 175 matches
Mail list logo