https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118196
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118022
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118196
--- Comment #2 from Arsen Arsenović ---
fixed, thanks for the report
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118022
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118022
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77958
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arsen at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117305
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arsen at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117241
Bug ID: 117241
Summary: Various pedwarns in c-decl.cc are behind
!in_system_header_at
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112534
--- Comment #18 from Arsen Arsenović ---
the patch would likely be beneficial anyway - overriding configure-discovered
flags seems fragile
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116914
--- Comment #6 from Arsen Arsenović ---
You need -fext-numeric-literals or a GNU C++ -std - the original was built with
-std=gnu++20.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116457
--- Comment #11 from Arsen Arsenović ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #9)
> (In reply to Arsen Arsenović from comment #8)
> > > what happens if you have 2 structs marked as randomize_layout but the
> > > order
> > > of the definition
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116457
--- Comment #8 from Arsen Arsenović ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #7)
> (In reply to Arsen Arsenović from comment #6)
> > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> > > > but it is already in reliable real-world use.
> > >
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116457
--- Comment #6 from Arsen Arsenović ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> > but it is already in reliable real-world use.
>
> Then that real world use is broken.
>
> >It's a pretty isolated change and doesn't impact any later stage
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116882
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arsen at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116793
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116502
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116793
--- Comment #13 from Arsen Arsenović ---
I realized there were preprocessed full sources attached to the bug and tested
those also. they did not ICE, so I will send the patch (though I'd still
appreciate seeing results from large programs and t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112341
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
--- Comment #5 from Arsen Ars
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116793
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #59191|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116793
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |arsen at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116775
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116327
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ivor+gccbugzilla at posteo dot
ee
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116633
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116344
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94150
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arsen at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116633
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arsen at gcc dot gnu.org
Ke
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106973
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
--- Comment #10 from Arsen Ar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108620
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102217
--- Comment #11 from Arsen Arsenović ---
(In reply to John Eivind Helset from comment #9)
> Hit this as well on master (9d5c500c4fa) in something like `co_return
> co_await f(a, b ? c : d);`, if I lift the conditional out of await it seems
> ok.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109283
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arsen at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106973
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arsen at gcc dot gnu.org
As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116502
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105475
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
--- Comment #6 from Arsen Ars
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113457
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
--- Comment #10 from Arsen Ar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109867
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |arsen at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105104
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arsen at gcc dot gnu.org
As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115859
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104050
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116502
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115851
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arsen at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113457
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Trying to emulate |Nesting coroutine
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54367
Bug 54367 depends on bug 101367, which changed state.
Bug 101367 Summary: [coroutines] destructor for capture in lambda temporary
operand to co_yield expression called twice
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101367
What
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101367
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108620
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arsen at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112699
--- Comment #4 from Arsen Arsenović ---
it would IMO - no use in libc stuff in freestanding. mind proposing a patch?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84052
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arsen at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102217
--- Comment #10 from Arsen Arsenović ---
(In reply to John Eivind Helset from comment #9)
> Hit this as well on master (9d5c500c4fa) in something like `co_return
> co_await f(a, b ? c : d);`, if I lift the conditional out of await it seems
> ok.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115859
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arsen at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104050
--- Comment #8 from Arsen Arsenović ---
possibly related to PR c++/101118 (and notably the fix for it)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104050
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arsen at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115731
--- Comment #3 from Arsen Arsenović ---
ah, no, never mind - it does. per [expr.prim.lambda]#6,
... Otherwise, it is a non-static member function or member function
template, ...
so, yeah, we need to complete that type, likely
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115731
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arsen at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116344
Bug ID: 116344
Summary: Wlto-type-mismatch and Wodr should show what TUs
mismatched
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105595
--- Comment #8 from Arsen Arsenović ---
indeed, but that's also true for the functions, no?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105595
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116178
--- Comment #3 from Arsen Arsenović ---
+1, 'latest' might be a bit of a footgun
> I would be happier with -std=c++experimental or possibly -std=c++next
or both, for latest released and latest draft standard revisions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109224
--- Comment #6 from Arsen Arsenović ---
so, indeed, this appears to fix the original testcase:
modified gcc/gimple-ssa-warn-access.cc
@@ -1762,7 +1762,16 @@ new_delete_mismatch_p (tree new_decl, tree delete_decl)
void *np = NULL, *dp = NUL
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109224
--- Comment #5 from Arsen Arsenović ---
(actually, it's simpler to make the operator new simply have template in the reproducer rather than the pack constrained to size 0)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109224
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Wmismatched-new-delete |Wmismatched-new-delete
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105595
--- Comment #4 from Arsen Arsenović ---
hm, actually, is this valid code?
in https://eel.is/c++draft/basic.def.odr#15 the standard says:
For any definable item D with definitions in multiple translation units,
- (15.1) if D is a non-inline non
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116151
--- Comment #2 from Arsen Arsenović ---
I suspect this is due to EH - -fno-exceptions fixes the C++ case, as does
noexcept, and -fexceptions breaks the C case.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116151
Bug ID: 116151
Summary: [7.1 Regression] G++ fails to diagnose
-Waggressive-loop-optimizations when going past the
end of an array
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115908
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arsen at gcc dot gnu.org
Last recon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113773
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-07-30
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115309
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arsen at gcc dot gnu.org
Last recon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104981
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||netcan1996 at gmail dot com
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54367
Bug 54367 depends on bug 103358, which changed state.
Bug 103358 Summary: what is the first constructor argument of lambda coroutine
promise_type?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103358
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103358
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arsen at gcc dot gnu.org
Reso
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110855
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||redbeard0531 at gmail dot com
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102363
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arsen at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106667
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109224
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112341
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110855
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115906
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111728
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |arsen at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105475
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |arsen at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110171
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |arsen at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103868
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101367
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nilsgladitz at gmail dot com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100611
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95457
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116057
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arsen at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115660
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arsen at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103953
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105475
--- Comment #3 from Arsen Arsenović ---
ah, seems that we're missing handling of error_mark_node in a few places while
processing a coroutine, causing the middle-end to be confused later. I'll
leave that for later.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109867
--- Comment #3 from Arsen Arsenović ---
(In reply to Arsen Arsenović from comment #2)
> this corresponds to the four switches emitted for the coroutine
> implementation after morphing these fns into coroutine functions. the other
> cases are un
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110171
--- Comment #2 from Arsen Arsenović ---
no - it is because convert_to_void does not know how to warn about discarded
co_awaits, and it does not get re-invoked when we expand co_awaits
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115907
--- Comment #48 from Arsen Arsenović ---
Please stop resetting the bug status. You create unneeded churn. This bug is
invalid.
(In reply to cqwrteur from comment #43)
> This is completely BS. Old libc cannot build with the latest gcc since th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104981
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arsen at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105475
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arsen at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99575
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fchelnokov at gmail dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103963
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102217
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arsen at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110855
--- Comment #5 from Arsen Arsenović ---
agreed, but note that it still gives us the name of the actor function:
pr110855.C:51:1ReturnObject bar(int)
pr110855.C:51:1void bar(bar(int)::_Z3bari.Frame*)
(the latter print is from initial_suspen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115951
--- Comment #6 from Arsen Arsenović ---
*** Bug 115918 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115918
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109867
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108643
Arsen Arsenović changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arsen at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
1 - 100 of 212 matches
Mail list logo