[Bug c++/103912] New: ICE in a consteval function in cp_gimplify_expr, at cp/cp-gimplify.c:557

: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: 0xd34df00d at gmail dot com Target Milestone: --- This program: #include namespace { constexpr uint64_t CalcHash (std::string_view name) { return 0

[Bug c++/62241] C++14 generalized lambda capture doesn't work with uniform initialization syntax.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62241 --- Comment #4 from Georg Rudoy <0xd34df00d at gmail dot com> --- Also, while experimenting I've found that adding a non-initializing capture element to the list somewhat mitigates the issue. That is, if the capture list looks like

[Bug c++/62241] C++14 generalized lambda capture doesn't work with uniform initialization syntax.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62241 --- Comment #3 from Georg Rudoy <0xd34df00d at gmail dot com> --- Not yet. Should I?

[Bug c++/62241] C++14 generalized lambda capture doesn't work with uniform initialization syntax.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62241 --- Comment #1 from Georg Rudoy <0xd34df00d at gmail dot com> --- Created attachment 33387 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33387&action=edit Successfully compiling code.

[Bug c++/62241] New: C++14 generalized lambda capture doesn't work with uniform initialization syntax.

IRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: 0xd34df00d at gmail dot com Created attachment 33386 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33386&action=edit Failing code Passing a lambda cop

[Bug c++/53479] Control flow analysis reports warnings in switch over an enum class even if all possible values have their branches

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53479 --- Comment #2 from Georg Rudoy <0xd34df00d at gmail dot com> 2012-05-24 20:04:56 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) > Foo f = Foo(2); > assert( DoFoo( f ) ); > > Undefined behaviour. Yes, it is. And isn't it happening

[Bug c++/53479] New: Control flow analysis too alarming with switch over an enum class

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53479 Bug #: 53479 Summary: Control flow analysis too alarming with switch over an enum class Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED