[Bug ada/116644] Warnings in generic code don't report column number

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116644 --- Comment #2 from Iru Cai --- (In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #1) > Why is that insufficient exactly? 256 is clearly not in range of My_Byte. I mean the warning messages don't have the information pointing out which code in this line

[Bug ada/116644] New: Warnings in generic code don't report column number

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116644 Bug ID: 116644 Summary: Warnings in generic code don't report column number Product: gcc Version: 14.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compo

[Bug tree-optimization/115824] [12 Regression] Strange -Warray-bounds warning when assigning an initializer list to a vector of pointers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115824 --- Comment #11 from Iru Cai --- (In reply to Sam James from comment #7) > (In reply to Randy MacLeod from comment #5) > > As far as I know, the commit itself is fine, and it's the pesky middle-end > warnings again getting confused. > > Jonath

[Bug tree-optimization/115824] [12 Regression] Strange -Warray-bounds warning when assigning an initializer list to a vector of pointers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115824 --- Comment #6 from Iru Cai --- I build a GCC with 12.3.0 source, and replace the libstdc++ with the 12.4.0 one, and reproduce this problem.

[Bug libstdc++/115824] New: Strange -Warray-bounds warning when assigning an initializer list to a vector of pointers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115824 Bug ID: 115824 Summary: Strange -Warray-bounds warning when assigning an initializer list to a vector of pointers Product: gcc Version: 12.4.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/109260] New: -fdump-ada-spec does not support C++ namespaces

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109260 Bug ID: 109260 Summary: -fdump-ada-spec does not support C++ namespaces Product: gcc Version: 12.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component

[Bug c/102909] Missing -Wunused-but-set-variable warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102909 --- Comment #3 from Iru Cai --- Looks like this kind of things are detected in the front-end. The GNAT front-end can warn on the similar things: procedure Main is A : Integer; B : constant Integer := 1; begin A := 0;

[Bug c/102909] Missing -Wunused-but-set-variable warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102909 --- Comment #2 from Iru Cai --- So it looks something like https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44677 GCC thinks ``a`` is set but not used in ``a = 1 + b;``, but is used in ``a = 1; a += b;``.

[Bug c/102909] New: Missing -Wunused-but-set-variable warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102909 Bug ID: 102909 Summary: Missing -Wunused-but-set-variable warning Product: gcc Version: 11.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c

[Bug other/102495] New: optimize some consecutive byte load pattern to word load

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102495 Bug ID: 102495 Summary: optimize some consecutive byte load pattern to word load Product: gcc Version: 11.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Pr

[Bug c++/101775] New: G++ drops namespace prefix of argument in the referenced function symbol

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101775 Bug ID: 101775 Summary: G++ drops namespace prefix of argument in the referenced function symbol Product: gcc Version: 11.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: nor

[Bug ada/101385] -Werror doesn't have effect on Ada frontend

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101385 --- Comment #2 from Iru Cai --- Thanks, -gnatwe works for both gcc and gnatmake. I see in the gnat_ugn manual that there is still the -Werror option that causes GCC back end to treat warnings as errors. Is that means -gnatwe is for front end, an

[Bug ada/101385] New: -Werror doesn't have effect on Ada frontend

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101385 Bug ID: 101385 Summary: -Werror doesn't have effect on Ada frontend Product: gcc Version: 11.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: ad

[Bug target/101175] New: builtin_clz generates wrong bsr instruction

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101175 Bug ID: 101175 Summary: builtin_clz generates wrong bsr instruction Product: gcc Version: 11.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: ta

[Bug c++/100699] New: g++ doesn't warn uninitialized field when the class is derived from another class

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100699 Bug ID: 100699 Summary: g++ doesn't warn uninitialized field when the class is derived from another class Product: gcc Version: 11.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Seve

[Bug target/100347] [11/12 Regression] GCC 11 does not recognize skylake; translates "march=native" to "x86_64"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100347 Iru Cai changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mytbk920423 at gmail dot com --- Comment #6 f

[Bug c/97982] integer casting after abs() causes undefined behavior

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97982 --- Comment #1 from Iru Cai --- Hmm, I saw in the abs(3) that "Trying to take the absolute value of the most negative integer is not defined." But it's still strange to see a uint32->uint64_t cast results in a negative value.

[Bug c/97982] New: integer casting after abs() causes undefined behavior

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97982 Bug ID: 97982 Summary: integer casting after abs() causes undefined behavior Product: gcc Version: 10.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compo