https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67133
--- Comment #29 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Martin Jambor from comment #28)
> I see, thinking about signature changes, I forgot about the situations
> where we do not have the body of the callee in the first place.
Yeah, the whole gimpl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67253
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-checking,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59104
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2013-12-19 00:00:00 |2015-8-18
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61441
--- Comment #8 from Sujoy ---
(In reply to jos...@codesourcery.com from comment #7)
> With -fno-signaling-nans, signaling NaN representations are trap
> representations - the compiler can assume that nothing ever manipulated as
> a floating-po
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67238
--- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini ---
Mainline works for me.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63336
Marc changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||barnabe.marc at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63336
--- Comment #3 from Marc ---
Created attachment 36197
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36197&action=edit
GCC 5.2 preprocessed ICE code
xz file, because .ii is > 2 MB in size.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67160
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67224
--- Comment #13 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Eric from comment #12)
> I'm glad to know people like Joseph are working on UTF-8 in gcc.
I think at the moment, neither Joseph nor anyone else is planning to work on
this. There doesn't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28662
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jeff.science at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67250
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
Re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67254
Bug ID: 67254
Summary: On-stack memory regions with aligned attribute overlap
on ARM
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67254
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
Are you sure they are "live" at the same time? AFAIK when optimizing
their lifetime is disjunct. Does it work when replicating the printf
with 'reference' also before the one with 'data'?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67255
Bug ID: 67255
Summary: -Wpadded mixes apostrophes
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67254
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67255
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67235
Bug ID: 67235
Summary: Wrong Message of -Wvla for Standard ISO C90 However
Emitted with -std=c11
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: RESOLVED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67243
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
*** Bug 67237 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67237
Bug ID: 67237
Summary: Wrong Message of -Wvla for Standard ISO C90 However
Emitted with -std=c11
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: RESOLVED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67236
Bug ID: 67236
Summary: Wrong Message of -Wvla for Standard ISO C90 However
Emitted with -std=c11
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: RESOLVED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67243
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
*** Bug 67236 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67243
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
*** Bug 67235 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67243
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
*** Bug 67234 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67243
--- Comment #7 from Marek Polacek ---
*** Bug 67233 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67233
Bug ID: 67233
Summary: Wrong Message of -Wvla on ISO C90 Emitted with
-std=c11
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: RESOLVED
Severity: normal
Priority: P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67243
--- Comment #9 from Marek Polacek ---
*** Bug 67231 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67234
Bug ID: 67234
Summary: Wrong Message of -Wvla for Standard ISO C90 However
Emitted with -std=c11
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: RESOLVED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67243
--- Comment #8 from Marek Polacek ---
*** Bug 67232 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67231
Bug ID: 67231
Summary: Wrong Message of -Wvla on ISO C90 Emitted with
-std=c11
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: RESOLVED
Severity: normal
Priority: P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67243
--- Comment #10 from Marek Polacek ---
*** Bug 67230 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67232
Bug ID: 67232
Summary: Wrong Message of -Wvla on ISO C90 Emitted with
-std=c11
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: RESOLVED
Severity: normal
Priority: P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67230
Bug ID: 67230
Summary: Wrong Message of -Wvla on ISO C90 Emitted with
-std=c11
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: RESOLVED
Severity: normal
Priority: P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67256
Bug ID: 67256
Summary: [C++11] Global scope contaminated with symbols from
mathcalls.h
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67257
Bug ID: 67257
Summary: Internal compiler error in retrieve_specialization
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67255
--- Comment #2 from Дилян Палаузов ---
git clone https://cgit.cyrus.foundation/cyrus-imapd
cd cyrus-imapd
libtoolize
autoreconf -i
CFLAGS="-Wpadded" ./configure --with-sqlite
make 2>&1 | grep righ | sort -u
prints:
imap/append.h:62:9: warning:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67028
--- Comment #7 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Aug 18 12:21:41 2015
New Revision: 226967
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226967&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/67028
* combine.c (simplify_comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67256
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67256
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c++ |libstdc++
Severity|major
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67255
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67255
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
GCC uses consistent quotes, but depends on environment variables such as LANG.
Presumably one of the commands you are running sets LANG=C or similar, which
causes GCC to output ASCII apostrophes. If you wan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67255
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
Yeah, I see nothing wrong in GCC source files.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67256
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
N.B. the functions happen to be declared in but they are
standard functions declared in and so your code would already have
failed to compile in C++03 if anyone included (and the same applies
for when t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67257
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
St
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67255
Дилян Палаузов changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67258
Bug ID: 67258
Summary: "invalid vptr" false positive from ubsan for virtual
inheritance
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67222
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Tue Aug 18 13:41:27 2015
New Revision: 226969
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226969&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/67222
* gimple-low.c (lower_stmt): Don't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67256
--- Comment #3 from Michał Fita ---
Contrary to my expectations #include doesn't work either. I would
expect these not declared in global if standard says unspecified, as my logic
whisper that would be more C++ way. I understand then I shouldn't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67028
--- Comment #8 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Tue Aug 18 14:27:50 2015
New Revision: 226971
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226971&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/67028
* combine.c (simplify_comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61578
--- Comment #17 from Fredrik Hederstierna
---
Created attachment 36201
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36201&action=edit
Simple example giving +50% code size increase compared gcc-4.8.5 and gcc-5.2.0
Simple example giving +
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67028
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67160
--- Comment #2 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Aug 18 14:38:51 2015
New Revision: 226972
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226972&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
c-family/
2015-08-18 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/67160
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67160
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61578
--- Comment #18 from Fredrik Hederstierna
---
Created attachment 36202
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36202&action=edit
Disasm for -mthumb also, code size increase was +48%.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66957
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Aug 18 14:43:44 2015
New Revision: 226974
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226974&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/66957
* search.c (protected_accessible_p): Revert f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58063
--- Comment #16 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Aug 18 14:43:38 2015
New Revision: 226973
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226973&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/58063
* tree.c (bot_manip): Remap SAVE_EXPR.
Adde
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66957
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Aug 18 14:44:06 2015
New Revision: 226975
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226975&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/66957
* search.c (protected_accessible_p): Revert f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67160
Casey Carter changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Casey at Carter dot net
--- Comment #4 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67192
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67160
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
And the advantage of the feature-test macro is that users can test for that
specific feature independent of the __cplusplus value.
Of course if it's effected by -pedantic then that means it *isn't* support
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67192
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
Created attachment 36203
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36203&action=edit
Patch
The issue seems to be in here in c_parser_for_statement:
warn_for_misleading_indentation (for_loc, bod
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61441
--- Comment #9 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Tue, 18 Aug 2015, ssaraswati at gmail dot com wrote:
> Ok, have a further question though. For the current test case, which has the
> following code -
>
> float sNaN = __builtin_nansf ("
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67192
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
Problem also affects while statements; reproduced using example from comment #0
w with "for (;;)" replaced with "while (1)"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67211
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67192
--- Comment #5 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #3)
> Created attachment 36203 [details]
> Patch
>
> The issue seems to be in here in c_parser_for_statement:
>
> warn_for_misleading_indentation (for_loc, body_loc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67259
Bug ID: 67259
Summary: list-initialization of a reference fails to initialize
char array from string literal
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67192
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #36203|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67226
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2015-08-17 00:00:00 |2015-8-18
C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67260
Bug ID: 67260
Summary: [sh] Register spill bug for sibcall+complex+softfloat
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67243
--- Comment #11 from Chengnian Sun ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #10)
> *** Bug 67230 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Sorry, Marek.
I did not realize that I had submitted so many duplicate reports. I got gateway
e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67243
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67104
--- Comment #14 from Moritz Klammler ---
Thank you for taking care of this so quickly.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67192
--- Comment #7 from Andreas Arnez ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #3)
> The issue seems to be in here in c_parser_for_statement:
>
> warn_for_misleading_indentation (for_loc, body_loc,
> c_parser_p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67259
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66936
--- Comment #18 from Keith Marshall ---
(In reply to Francois-Xavier Coudert from comment #17)
> Given the history and reasons, I've committed the patch to restore build on
> mingw32. Marking as fixed on trunk.
Thanks. Looks like a cleaner way
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67066
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Tue Aug 18 18:04:32 2015
New Revision: 226984
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226984&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/67066
* doc/xml/manual/configure.xml (manual
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67216
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Tue Aug 18 18:04:48 2015
New Revision: 226986
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226986&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/67216
* testsuite/tr1/2_general_utilities/shared_p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67066
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67218
--- Comment #1 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Tue Aug 18 19:04:41 2015
New Revision: 226987
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226987&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR rtl-optimization/67218
* simplif
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67218
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolutio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67224
--- Comment #14 from Eric ---
While there may not be current demand for gcc to accept UTF-8 identifiers, the
fact that clang and Visual Studio support this C99 feature means source code
using Greek and accented characters in variable names is lik
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67224
--- Comment #15 from Eric ---
Created attachment 36206
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36206&action=edit
Improved UTF-8 identifier patch
Improved patch to support UTF-8 identifiers. This version by default does no
translati
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67192
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66936
--- Comment #19 from Francois-Xavier Coudert ---
Author: fxcoudert
Date: Tue Aug 18 19:56:20 2015
New Revision: 226988
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226988&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libfortran/66936
* io/unix.c (__MINGW32_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67224
--- Comment #16 from Eric ---
With my second patch the command line must now include the options
-finput-charset=UTF-8 -fextended-identifiers -fexec-charset=UTF-8
or otherwise C99 will also be used for the default execution character set.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66936
--- Comment #20 from Francois-Xavier Coudert ---
Author: fxcoudert
Date: Tue Aug 18 19:58:15 2015
New Revision: 226989
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226989&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libfortran/66936
* io/unix.c (__MINGW32_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66936
--- Comment #21 from Francois-Xavier Coudert ---
Now backported to all active branches.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67192
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36757
--- Comment #3 from Francois-Xavier Coudert ---
Author: fxcoudert
Date: Tue Aug 18 20:07:57 2015
New Revision: 226990
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226990&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/36757
* builtins.c (expand_bu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36757
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67224
--- Comment #17 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Tue, 18 Aug 2015, ejolson at unr dot edu wrote:
> As iconv was installed on every GNU/Linux system I've tried, I'm not sure what
> is wrong with using the C99 mode present in newer relea
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67192
--- Comment #10 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #8)
> Does GCC work at all if input_location is saved and restored in
> c_parser_peek_token? I guess not, it seems too much still relies in
> input_locatio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66425
--- Comment #20 from Jan Engelhardt ---
Seems like the short route is to add a new attribute
((warn_unused_result_with_void_cancelling)) that exhibits the "desired"
behavior of (void) cancelling the warning, and then make glibc use that.
Simple,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66919
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Aug 18 21:29:07 2015
New Revision: 226993
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226993&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/66919
* g++.dg/cpp1y/auto-fn27.C: New.
Added:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67261
Bug ID: 67261
Summary: Demangler infinite recursion
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67250
--- Comment #13 from Jeff Hammond ---
This is all fair. I try very hard to fix my own bugs and submit patches, but
in this case I am wholly unqualified. I don't know the first thing about
implementing a production compiler, or any compiler for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67262
Bug ID: 67262
Summary: Massive number of nested SWITCH statements with -O1
causes g++ internal error
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67263
Bug ID: 67263
Summary: demangler mishandles const qualifier on template
parameter with function type
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67224
--- Comment #18 from Eric ---
Thanks Joseph for the clarification about the two different versions of iconv.
I was admittedly confused about this until moments ago. Anyway, I just
discovered that libiconv doesn't support conversions to and from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67261
Mikhail Maltsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||miyuki at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61321
Mikhail Maltsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at airs dot com
--- Comment #10 fr
1 - 100 of 118 matches
Mail list logo
