https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118843
chenglulu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118843
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by LuluCheng :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ee579b7c257468b9032ab4583ec455fa871d4428
commit r15-7524-gee579b7c257468b9032ab4583ec455fa871d4428
Author: Lulu Cheng
Date: Wed Feb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118828
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by LuluCheng :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:753306bbaebb4a56ee8dde893e14dbd9e5269df6
commit r15-7523-g753306bbaebb4a56ee8dde893e14dbd9e5269df6
Author: Lulu Cheng
Date: Tue Feb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90579
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12/13/14/15 Regression]|[12/13/14 Regression] Huge
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118873
Bug ID: 118873
Summary: -favoid-store-forwarding makes a mess out of a STLF
fail
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118870
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-02-14
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118869
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Component|c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118868
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90579
--- Comment #21 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:27653070db35216d5115cc25672fcc6a51203d26
commit r15-7520-g27653070db35216d5115cc25672fcc6a51203d26
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118872
Jin Ma changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118872
Bug ID: 118872
Summary: RISCV: internal compiler error: in emit_move_insn, at
expr.cc:4636 for rvv
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117047
--- Comment #9 from Sam James ---
> but what would be really helpful is an option to call
> gcc_jit_context_set_bool_option (ctxt, GCC_JIT_BOOL_OPTION_SELFCHECK_GC);
> on the underlying gcc_jit_context (or I suppose you could hack up your emac
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118871
Bug ID: 118871
Summary: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118870
Bug ID: 118870
Summary: internal compiler error: in force_constant_size, at
gimplify.cc:802
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118869
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||compile-time-hog,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118868
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
Ah, it's kind of a "regression", and kind of not, as the builtin was only added
in r12-5368-gefb7c51024ccad.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118869
Bug ID: 118869
Summary: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault signal
terminated program cc1
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118868
Bug ID: 118868
Summary: internal compiler error: 'verify_gimple' failed
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118867
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||TREE
--- Comment #13 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118867
--- Comment #12 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #8)
> (In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #7)
> > > Would be useful to have a bisect on where the original testcase in comment
> > > #0 started to warn.
> > GCC 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118867
--- Comment #11 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
> Wait:
> if (&listJets.D.32199._M_impl._M_node.D.14392 == _30)
>
>
> This is not the canonical order. The constant should be last ...
Oh but it is NOT a con
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118867
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||10.1.0
Summary|[15 regressio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118867
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #60493|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118867
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #7)
> > Would be useful to have a bisect on where the original testcase in comment
> > #0 started to warn.
> GCC 14 compiling GCC 15 preprocessed sources also emits th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118867
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118867
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
So for my reduced test, only DOM is able to optimize it (still); you just need
to disable ifcombine as ifcombine combines the if statements together before
dom is able to run.
So maybe my reduced testcase a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118867
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
Wait:
if (&listJets.D.32199._M_impl._M_node.D.14392 == _30)
This is not the canonical order. The constant should be last ...
forwprop1 creates:
_55 = listJets.D.32199._M_impl._M_node.D.14392._M_next;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118865
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118867
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
--- Comment #4 from And
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118867
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118867
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 60493
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60493&action=edit
Reduced testcase for the missed optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118867
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
This one looks like a missed optimization
```
_30 = listJets.D.31591._M_impl._M_node.D.14392._M_next;
if (&listJets.D.31591._M_impl._M_node.D.14392 == _30)
goto ; [5.50%]
else
goto ; [94.50%]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118867
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118375
Peter Damianov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||peter0x44 at disroot dot org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118865
--- Comment #9 from scott snyder ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #8)
See bug 118867, thanks!
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: snyder at bnl dot gov
Target Milestone: ---
hi -
(Refiled from bug 118865 as requested.)
This test case generates a false-positive -Wfree-nonheap-object warning
with gcc 15 -O1 (tested as of 20250213 on a fedora 40
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118865
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to scott snyder from comment #7)>
> This does not warn with gcc14, but does with gcc15, even with your
> proposed patch.
This looks like a different missed optimization:
```
_30 = listJets.D.32
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118865
--- Comment #7 from scott snyder ---
Thanks Andrew!
It appears that i was too aggressive in reducing the original source,
which as far as i can tell does handle empty containers properly.
For the record, it can be seen here (not my code, BTW...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118815
--- Comment #8 from Haochen Jiang ---
Proposed patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-February/675748.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107741
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathaniel Shead :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:12feb78be517472ca941953dce47d6e78e5a17f8
commit r15-7518-g12feb78be517472ca941953dce47d6e78e5a17f8
Author: Nathaniel Shead
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118832
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118832
--- Comment #10 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:28b2ad5341f875ee7e034b0c6f9e4eb725e19a8f
commit r15-7516-g28b2ad5341f875ee7e034b0c6f9e4eb725e19a8f
Author: Robin Dapp
Date: Thu Feb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116613
--- Comment #38 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6ac313525a1faecb9f39a0ba3240f7a9ead91dcc
commit r15-7515-g6ac313525a1faecb9f39a0ba3240f7a9ead91dcc
Author: David Malcolm
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117047
--- Comment #8 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #4)
Thanks.
> (In reply to David Malcolm from comment #2)
> > What does printing *wrapper in the debugger look like?
> >
>
> Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103524
Bug 103524 depends on bug 118863, which changed state.
Bug 118863 Summary: Cannot #include in global module fragment with
-fsanitize=undefined
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118863
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118856
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Shorter test:
struct A { A (); ~A (); };
struct B { B (const A & = A {}); ~B (); };
struct C { C (const B &, const A & = A {}); ~C (); int *begin (); int *end ();
};
void
foo ()
{
for (auto &i : C { B {}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118863
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98735
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||davidfromonline at gmail dot
com
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118856
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Comparing the gimple dumps before/after r15-7481 and latest trunk, before that
change I see it first constructs one allocator, then the inner vector, then
another allocator, then another vector, everything w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117739
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Marek Polacek
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:88ca0670c79f123cc84928f78cd3d5eb46b91338
commit r14-11307-g88ca0670c79f123cc84928f78cd3d5eb46b91338
Author: Marek Polacek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117739
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117992
Bug 117992 depends on bug 117739, which changed state.
Bug 117739 Summary: `-fhardened -Wl,-z,lazy` still passes `-z now` to the
linker
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117739
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117293
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118856
--- Comment #6 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
The ICE is gone, but the tests in mesonlsp-4.3.7 are still failing. I think
test flags the real problem, but I'm not sure if it's valid use of temps.
Minimized example out of
https://github.com/JCWasmx
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117739
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a134dcd8a010744a0097d190f73a4efc2e381531
commit r15-7514-ga134dcd8a010744a0097d190f73a4efc2e381531
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: Tu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109180
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
I wonder if this is due to targetm.cxx.cdtor_returns_this .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118080
--- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 60492
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60492&action=edit
Patch
This patch works for me and is currently regtesting. Feedback welcome.
Will submit with an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118862
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
One would need to rewrite gfc_conv_powi to work on wide_ints. Another option
is just punt at trying to optimize it, if (lhs_prec > HOST_BITS_PER_WIDE_INT)
return 0;
Though, maybe in such case the n & mask c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70536
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70536
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:53e1686e6e0c3e809384e6fcf5eed46f37bc296b
commit r15-7512-g53e1686e6e0c3e809384e6fcf5eed46f37bc296b
Author: Ed Catmur
Date: Sat Feb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109180
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118865
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note the reduced testcase is actually NOT a false positive, it shows up because
of jump threading; PR109071 recordes the diagnostic issue there.
As I mentioned in comment #1 . comment #4 better explains wha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118866
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118866
--- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 60491
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60491&action=edit
A patch for arm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118865
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 60490
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60490&action=edit
Improve list assumetions after constructor
I have not tested this patch but this should improve the situtation
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118865
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note the missed optimization in GCC 14 is causing the warning NOT to show up in
the original example. Once the optimization is done (via the `if (jbeg == jend)
__builtin_unreachable()`), it shows up in GCC 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118865
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118862
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118865
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.1.0
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118865
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 60489
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60489&action=edit
only false positive warning case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118865
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c++ |tree-optimization
Summary|[1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118866
Bug ID: 118866
Summary: LABEL_REF without updating LABEL_NUSES
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118845
--- Comment #9 from Thomas Koenig ---
Should be fixed by
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cdb4d27a4c2786cf1b1b0eb1872eac6a5f931578
(I'll wait for closing this until it is confirmed that Lapack
builds again).
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: snyder at bnl dot gov
Target Milestone: ---
hi -
This test case generates a false-positive -Wfree-nonheap-object warning
with gcc 15 -O1 (tested as of 20250213 on a fedora 40 x86_64 system):
-- test.cc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118864
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118864
Bug ID: 118864
Summary: Add nomerge attribute
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118863
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118860
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
Summary|ICE Segfault wi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118861
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-02-13
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115112
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Gaius Mulley
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3d961691e0878e1328f9cbbc1d1af5e573ee6786
commit r14-11306-g3d961691e0878e1328f9cbbc1d1af5e573ee6786
Author: Gaius Mulley
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118858
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118863
Bug ID: 118863
Summary: Cannot #include in global module fragment
with -fsanitize=undefined
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118862
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118862
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118862
Bug ID: 118862
Summary: UBSAN: shift exponent too large since
r15-7345-gc2a0ee58865c5a
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118861
Bug ID: 118861
Summary: 32bit loop transformed into 64bit loop on Aarch32
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118610
--- Comment #2 from Vladimir Makarov ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #1)
> Indeed, I have reopened PR rtl-optimization/118067
Sorry, I can not reproduce it with today trunk for sparc64 with -m32 and -m64.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111042
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus ---
Regarding Sollve_VV, that's now OpenMP_VV.
The testcase is:
tests/5.0/teams_loop/test_target_teams_loop_allocate.c
And the pull request also migrated to:
https://github.com/OpenMP-Validation-and-Verifica
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118611
--- Comment #8 from Tamar Christina ---
Yeah, that makes sense. Thanks for working on it!
We've been trying to reduce the different cases where we see this happening in
the hopes to provide more data to tune any possible heuristics.
So the pa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118611
--- Comment #7 from Vladimir Makarov ---
I worked on this issue this week. I tried several approaches. I added the best
patch as an attachment. The patch changes an order of coloring allocnos in one
thread.
Unfortunately, although the patch s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118611
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||acoplan at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118611
--- Comment #5 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Created attachment 60488
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60488&action=edit
Patch solving the PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118856
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6f7935b3fd60968cff1b3252edf40022f25705aa
commit r15-7508-g6f7935b3fd60968cff1b3252edf40022f25705aa
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118853
Pavel M changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pavel.morozkin at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
an,lto --disable-multilib --disable-libsanitizer
--enable-checking
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 15.0.1 20250213 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118859
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
--- Comment #1 from Tobias B
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86660
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118859
Bug ID: 118859
Summary: [C++] dispatch accepts non-pointer template argument
with adjust_args
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: accepts-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110338
Bug 110338 depends on bug 113800, which changed state.
Bug 113800 Summary: [C++26] P2308R1 - Template parameter initialization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113800
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113800
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
1 - 100 of 155 matches
Mail list logo
