https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67909
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47595
Sebastian Pop changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67910
--- Comment #5 from Guille ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #4)
> This seems to be already fixed on trunk.
Just tested on most recent gcc version 5.2.1 20151006 (GCC) and it doesn't
compile:
t.c: In function ‘int main()’:
t.c:10:12: e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67913
Bug ID: 67913
Summary: new expression with negative size not diagnosed
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67913
--- Comment #1 from Martin Sebor ---
The following otherwise untested patch makes GCC reject new expressions with
negative numbers of elements:
@@ -3066,6 +3378,14 @@ build_new (vec **placement, tree type, tree
nelts,
else
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56758
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51284
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57126
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64945
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67914
Bug ID: 67914
Summary: Unrecognized command line argument warning not shown
unless there is another warning for -Wno-*
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67914
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63499
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||e...@coeus-group.com
--- Comment #5 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67892
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #2 fr
-werror --enable-multilib
Thread model: posix
gcc version 6.0.0 20151009 (experimental) [trunk revision 228653] (GCC)
$
$ gcc-trunk -Os -c small.c
$ gcc-5.2 -O2 -c small.c
$
$ gcc-trunk -O2 -c small.c
small.c: In function ‘fn2’:
small.c:10:1: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
fn2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65779
--- Comment #10 from baoshan ---
This is my fix for this issue, any comment is welcome.
---
10 gcc/function.c |5 +++--
11 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
12
13 diff --git a/gcc/function.c b/gcc/functi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65779
--- Comment #11 from Andrew Pinski ---
I suspect this was fixed for GCC 6 with the patch that fixed bug 67789 (which
is the more correct patch).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65779
--- Comment #12 from baoshan ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #11)
> I suspect this was fixed for GCC 6 with the patch that fixed bug 67789
> (which is the more correct patch).
I think they are two different issues. 67789 is duplicate
: posix
gcc version 6.0.0 20151009 (experimental) [trunk revision 228653] (GCC)
$
$ gcc-trunk -O2 small.c; ./a.out
$ gcc-5.2 -O3 small.c; ./a.out
$
$ gcc-trunk -O3 small.c
$ ./a.out
Aborted (core dumped)
$
int a[6], b = 1, d, e;
long long c;
static
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63176
TC changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rs2740 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #3 from TC ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67910
--- Comment #6 from Guille ---
Can confirm it does compile on gcc version 6.0.0 20151004.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67910
Guille changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
101 - 121 of 121 matches
Mail list logo
