https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100383
--- Comment #5 from Hannes Domani ---
This could be closed since gcc-13.1.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52160
Hannes Domani changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ssbssa at yahoo dot de
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86152
Hannes Domani changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ssbssa at yahoo dot de
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100402
--- Comment #11 from Hannes Domani ---
> Your testcase does not compile with the C compiler:
>
> Compiling it with the C++ compiler works for me:
Sorry about the c/c++ confusion.
> Created attachment 50754 [details]
> Tentative fix
>
> Plea
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100402
--- Comment #3 from Hannes Domani ---
Created attachment 50745
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50745&action=edit
output of -fdump-tree-optimized
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100402
--- Comment #2 from Hannes Domani ---
Created attachment 50744
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50744&action=edit
assembly (-S)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100402
--- Comment #1 from Hannes Domani ---
Created attachment 50743
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50743&action=edit
preprocessed code (-E)
: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: ssbssa at yahoo dot de
Target Milestone: ---
The following example:
-- >8 --
// gcc -O1 test.c
#include
static jmp_buf buf;
static bool stop = false;
void call_func(void(*f
Priority: P3
Component: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: ssbssa at yahoo dot de
Target Milestone: ---
Since binutils 2.36 [1], the objdump output [2] of the cfi sections directive
detection command (objdump -j .debug_frame -r conftest.o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98860
--- Comment #36 from Hannes Domani ---
Note: This is a binutils/ld bug:
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27268
And I've sent a patch there:
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2021-February/115434.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89807
--- Comment #1 from Hannes Domani ---
(In reply to Nickolay Kolchin-Semyonov from comment #0)
> uint8_t a = (v >> 24) & 0xFF; // ERROR: produces warning
> uint8_t a2 = v >> 24; // ERROR: produces warning
I think the '& 0xFF' part is opti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90526
Hannes Domani changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ssbssa at yahoo dot de
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94459
--- Comment #5 from Hannes Domani ---
I also should mention that this is a precursor to fix gdb_bug 24154:
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24154
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94459
--- Comment #3 from Domani Hannes ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> Looking through DW_TAG_const_type seems insufficient to me, can't there be
> other qualifications (at least DW_TAG_volatile_type, perhaps in various
> orders)?
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94459
--- Comment #2 from Domani Hannes ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> Looking through DW_TAG_const_type seems insufficient to me, can't there be
> other qualifications (at least DW_TAG_volatile_type, perhaps in various
> orders)?
>
Priority: P3
Component: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: ssbssa at yahoo dot de
Target Milestone: ---
For the following example:
template
struct MyClass
{
T value;
auto get()
{
return value;
}
auto &get_ref()
{
return value;
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92292
--- Comment #4 from Domani Hannes ---
(In reply to jos...@codesourcery.com from comment #3)
> On Tue, 31 Dec 2019, ssbssa at yahoo dot de wrote:
>
> > But does it make sense to do a format check multiple times for one function?
&g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92292
Domani Hannes changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ssbssa at yahoo dot de
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86593
Domani Hannes changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ssbssa at yahoo dot de
--- Comment #16
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88925
--- Comment #2 from Domani Hannes ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> It works for me on x86_64-linux. Note to get the desired behavior GCC
> relies on
> string-merging performed by the linker.
>
> Can you elaborate on the host/t
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: ssbssa at yahoo dot de
CC: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 45468
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45468&action=edit
test case
With the attached file, I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82027
--- Comment #11 from Domani Hannes ---
(In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #10)
> OK, so I did not realize that duplicate_thunk_for_node does not set
> clone_of but former_clone of, which is of course what it must do. I
> have checked and th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82027
--- Comment #4 from Domani Hannes ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #3)
> Note that original function does:
>
> void calcPercent( const char *name,int pos,int size )
> {
> int percent = 100*pos/size;
> if( percent!=m
: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: ssbssa at yahoo dot de
CC: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 42082
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42082&action=edit
test case
With the attached file I get a divisi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78787
Domani Hannes changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ssbssa at yahoo dot de
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70955
--- Comment #11 from Domani Hannes ---
I can confirm that this patch works for windows as well.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70955
Domani Hannes changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ssbssa at yahoo dot de
--- Comment #9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59124
--- Comment #37 from Domani Hannes ---
With the new patch there is still a warning with this example:
=== 8< ===
int f(void);
int test(void)
{
int baz[4];
int q = 0;
int d, i, j, sum;
for (i = 0; i < 2; i++)
{
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58042
Domani Hannes changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ssbssa at yahoo dot de
--- Comment #1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60349
Domani Hannes changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ssbssa at yahoo dot de
--- Comment #2
30 matches
Mail list logo
