https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94673
gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94673
--- Comment #3 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
I think this bug should be changed to a request to improve the diagnostics.
The diagnostic says:
```
:13:15: note: constraints not satisfied
:8:9: required by the constraints
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96416
gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc-bugs at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100205
--- Comment #11 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
Awesome, thank you, Jason!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100587
gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
The following snippet does not compile:
```c++
#include
static_assert(std::ranges::view);
```
https://godbolt.org/z/3qanzdrb5
The standard says that https
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95983
--- Comment #11 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
Thank you so much!
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Hi gcc-team,
the following code will not work on custom tuples that don't add a get ove
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100205
--- Comment #3 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
To be more precise my gcc build is:
```
> gcc-git -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=/opt/gcc/gcc-git//bin/g++
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/opt/gcc/gcc-git/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-li
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100205
--- Comment #2 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
Yeah, it compiled for me with a build from two weeks ago, too. I should have
mentioned that :)
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Hi gcc-team,
the following code compiles with gcc-10, but does not compile with gcc-11 any
more:
```cpp
#include
struct
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100146
--- Comment #10 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
Thank you!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95983
--- Comment #4 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
Hi Patrick,
thank you for that patch. I guess that it also fixes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96070.
Will this patch be backported to gcc-10?
Great work!
++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Hi gcc-team,
it seems that you implemented the float variants of in gcc-11.
Is there a reason that you did not define `__cpp_lib_to_chars`?
The following code
onent: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Hello gcc-team,
the following code:
```cpp
#include
#include
#include
#include
static_assert(std::same_as,
decltype(std::views::tak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99433
--- Comment #7 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
Thank you for the quick analysis!
> views::drop(E, F) is specified to be expression-equivalent to the braced
> init ranges::drop_view{E, F}
Is not completely true,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99433
--- Comment #5 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
Thank you for the fix, but the following code does not compile any more:
```c++
#include
#include
int main()
{
std::list list;
constexpr auto drop = [](urng_t &&
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99599
--- Comment #3 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
Hi Jason,
as you linked to https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97704, I'm
interested if your suggestion would allow that, too?
> But that's a matter for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99433
gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|custom friend |[11
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Hello gcc-team,
the following code does not compile with gcc-11 any more, but did with gcc-10.
```c++
#include
#include
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99320
--- Comment #2 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
You are right, it seems to be the same issue except that my function is
constexpr, and I can't use `static constexpr ...` within the function, but
Barry mentioned that use
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Hi gcc-team,
first of all, sorry if this is the wrong component, but I guess that this
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Hello gcc-team,
since gcc 10 the following code throws a deprecation warning, even though it
doesn't us
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97745
--- Comment #2 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
This bug is fixed and can be closed.
This ICE was reduced from our code base
(https://github.com/seqan/seqan3/issues/2236#issuecomment-723194705).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97704
--- Comment #3 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
Thank you, Marek Polacek for finding that revision.
I checked out the master branch and reverted the commit
f1612b8ae8a60f62cf5456b3357a341550534a7e and now everything compiles
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97759
--- Comment #10 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
And maybe a related question:
I know that an arithmetic implementation might auto-vectorize, but would a
popcount implementation do that too?
Since AVX512_BITALG
(https
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97759
--- Comment #9 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
Thank you for so many responses
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #1)
> Could you post the benchmark and the exact architecture where the arithmetic
> version is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97759
--- Comment #7 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
Created attachment 49530
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49530&action=edit
CMakeLists.txt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97759
--- Comment #8 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
Created attachment 49531
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49531&action=edit
has_single_bit_benchmark.cpp
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Hello gcc-team,
we are thrilled that C++20 offers some efficient bit implementation and that we
could exchange some of our own implementation with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97704
--- Comment #1 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
I forgot to add the error message:
```
: In instantiation of 'auto hard_error(t) [with t = int]':
:11:35: required by substitution of 'template requires
requ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96872
--- Comment #2 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
Thank you; was fixed!
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Hi gcc-team,
consider the following program:
```c++
struct non_exisiting {};
template
auto hard_error
++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Hi gcc-team,
the following code ices
```
template struct concat_view {
struct {
template using constify_if = int;
using concat_view_t = constify_if
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Hi gcc-team,
the following code ices:
```c++
#include
namespace seqan3 {
template struct
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: lto
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
CC: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Hi gcc-team,
I'm not sure if this is the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95322
--- Comment #15 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
Thank you!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95497
--- Comment #4 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
Thank you for fixing!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96113
gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96113
gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|std::vector | |std::vector
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Hi gcc-team,
the following code does not compile:
```
#include
#include
int main()
{
std
onent: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Hi gcc-team,
not long ago a filed a bug-report[1] that
`std::ranges::basic_istream_view::iterator` has no `std::iterator_traits`
entry.
&
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96042
--- Comment #2 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
I think this is too easy to say that this is not a "bug", we can also weaken
the terminology and say "potential-inconsistency".
Technically you are right, bu
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
The following code
```c++
#include
using iota_view = std::ranges::iota_view;
using reference_t = std::ranges
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95578
--- Comment #5 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
Thank you for the quick response and quick fix :)
erity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Hi gcc-team,
the following code does not compile (10.1.0 and trunk)
```c++
#include
#include
int
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Hello gcc-team,
the following code ICEs starting with gcc-11:
```c++
template
struct A{};
template
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Hallo gcc-team,
the following code worked with gcc9, but ICEs with gcc 10.1 and in trunk
```c++
template
struct
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Hello gcc-team,
I'm not sure if this is intended behaviour, or if this is a defect in the
standar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93983
gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc-bugs at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94819
--- Comment #1 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
A slightly more reduced example:
```c++
#include
template
struct alphabet_tuple_base
{
template
requires std::is_same_v
constexpr alphabet_tuple_base
us: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Hi gcc-team,
a recent report of mine https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_b
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Hi gcc!
The following code does not compile with gcc10 anymore:
```c++
struct foo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94674
--- Comment #3 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
Thank you for pointing me to this.
I find this highly unexpected. There was made a change to `std::type_traits` in
C++20 that sets default values, but it does not apply to all
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Hi gcc-team,
I'm not sure if I should have named the issue `std::iterator_traits is missing
de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94673
--- Comment #1 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
After playing with this a bit more, I found out that clang actually behaves
differently:
```c++
#include
#include
template
concept same_as = std::is_same_v;
template
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
What should I expect when I write the following concept:
```c++
#include
#include
template
concept
us: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
The following code worked until gcc 10:
```c++
struct base {
templat
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ipa
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
CC: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
The following code ICEs
```c++
struct search_param {
int total
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93667
gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc-bugs at
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Hi gcc-team,
this (invalid!) code ICEs:
```c++
#include
#include
template
concept bool semiregular
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93345
gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc-bugs at
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
The following code ICEs on a recent gcc-10 build, but worked in gcc 9 and
below:
```
template bool a = true
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93324
--- Comment #5 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
Thank you! I can confirm it being fixed <3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92541
--- Comment #4 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
Oh okay, how should I proceed? Create a new issue or hijack this one?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92541
gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc-bugs at
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
The following code worked in gcc9 and below, but fails with a recent snapshot
of gcc
```c++
struct empty
{};
template
c
++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
The following code works on gcc 9 and below, but ICEs on gcc10 with -Wall.
```
struct
{
template
static constexpr bool a() { return 0; }
} e;
template
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91525
--- Comment #3 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
On gcc-10 I get now the following stacktrace:
```
g++-git -std=c++17 -fconcepts -c ice.cpp
main.cpp: In function ‘std::string e()’:
main.cpp:46:16: internal compiler error
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92552
--- Comment #7 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
Thank you!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91525
--- Comment #2 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
This still fails and furthermore fails in `-std=c++2a` mode as well.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90764
--- Comment #3 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
*** Bug 91121 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91121
gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90764
--- Comment #2 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
This produces
```
> g++-git -std=c++17 ice.cpp
ice.cpp: In instantiation of ‘void g() [with f = e]’:
ice.cpp:7:17: required from here
ice.cpp:6:54: error: cannot ded
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86037
--- Comment #1 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
This still persists in gcc-9.2 and gcc-10.0.
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Hi gcc-team,
the following code ices on me:
```
template
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Hi gcc-team,
the following code ices:
```
#include
template
concept bool
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 47287
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92206
--- Comment #8 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
Thank you! I can confirm that the patch resolved the issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92206
gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc-bugs at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91495
gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc-bugs at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87768
--- Comment #6 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
I can confirm that this works from 9 and up. Is there any chance to backport it
to 8?
In the ticket it says `Target Milestone: 8.4`, does that mean there will be a
8.4 release
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
The following code segfaults on gcc 7 and gcc 8.
It seems to be fixed in gcc 9, but a variant of the following code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91121
--- Comment #1 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
Oh it might be the same one as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90764
: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Hello gcc-team,
the following code will ICE
```c++
template struct a { a(int); };
template struct b : a> { using a::a; };
template b(c)->b;
st
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Hello gcc-team,
compiling this program with `g++-8 -fconcepts -std=c++17 concept_ice.cpp`
```
struct a {};
template
ormal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Hello gcc-team,
this code changed output between gcc-7 and gcc-8
```
// pretty_function.cpp
#include
#in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84684
--- Comment #6 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
I use now a more simpler approach for the fold expression [1], but the problem
from this bug ticket still persisted when I used the same kind of assignment:
for (size_t i
: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 43552
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43552&action=edit
static_assert's throw even though they should
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82801
gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc-bugs at
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Hello gcc-team!
According to http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2017/n4659.pdf
[24.3.2.6.4]
or http
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82410
gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc-bugs at
++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
My problem is the following:
```
// main.cpp
#include
#include
using int32x4_t = int32_t __attribute__ ((__vector_size__(16)));
using uint32x4_t = uint32_t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61806
gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc-bugs at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80251
--- Comment #1 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
I'm sorry for the inconvenience! I didn't see that is_aggregate was just a
recent addition to the standard [1]. I just wanted to see if I can check at
compile time
: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Hi gcc-team,
is is_aggregate [1] really missing or is it within some experimental
namespaces?
If I try to compile the following:
```c++
#include
struct
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80172
--- Comment #3 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
Thank you for your feedback!
With std::array it works without a problem :)
: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 41044
--> ht
bstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 41038
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41038&action=edit
Example that a tuple of a variant can't be co
99 matches
Mail list logo
