https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71856
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71898
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 38939
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38939&action=edit
Candidate patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69560
--- Comment #13 from Andreas Schwab ---
alignof(long long) "type of a complete object"
alignof(foo) "type of a subobject"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71941
Bug ID: 71941
Summary: ICE with OpenMP tasks and queue
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libgomp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59833
--- Comment #10 from Aurelien Jarno ---
I have just posted a new version of the patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-07/msg01198.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71898
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #38939|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69560
--- Comment #14 from Mike Hommey ---
(In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #13)
> alignof(long long) "type of a complete object"
> alignof(foo) "type of a subobject"
But that doesn't tell why the alignment of a long long is 8 as a complete
ob
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71898
--- Comment #4 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #2)
> Created attachment 38939 [details]
> Candidate patch
Since this is a graphite fix, it might also fix PR71351 ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69560
--- Comment #15 from Andreas Schwab ---
Because the ABI says so.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71898
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Joost VandeVondele from comment #4)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #2)
> > Created attachment 38939 [details]
> > Candidate patch
>
> Since this is a graphite fix, it might also fix PR7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71503
--- Comment #5 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Wed Jul 20 08:31:35 2016
New Revision: 238512
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238512&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/71503
PR tree-optimization/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71683
--- Comment #3 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Wed Jul 20 08:31:35 2016
New Revision: 238512
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238512&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/71503
PR tree-optimization/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71942
Bug ID: 71942
Summary: [ARM] Zero-extending whats allready zero-extended even
when -O3
Product: gcc
Version: 5.4.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57165
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71942
--- Comment #1 from Albi ---
To give a minimum case:
int main(void)
{
volatile unsigned short foo = 0;
while(1) foo ^= 1;
}
creates:
ldrh.w r3, [sp, #6]
uxthr3, r3<< again no reason for this
eor.w r3, r3, #1
strh.w r3, [
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71941
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Status|UNCO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71943
Bug ID: 71943
Summary: Wreturn-type when combining destructor + return +
__noreturn__ function
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71942
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Targe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71945
Bug ID: 71945
Summary: Integer overflow in use counter of shared pointers
Product: gcc
Version: 5.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71942
--- Comment #3 from Albi ---
Agreed, after way more google research a lot of people complain about this.
Never the less this poses a big problem since it halves the performance of
every load on a sub-32-bit datatype.
Imho the problem issnt in t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71946
Bug ID: 71946
Summary: FD_ZERO macro parsing error in lambda function.
Product: gcc
Version: 5.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component: c+
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71941
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71941
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 38943
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38943&action=edit
gcc7-pr71941.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71943
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71946
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71937
--- Comment #7 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Execution times (seconds)
phase setup : 0.01 ( 0%) usr 0.00 ( 0%) sys 0.02 ( 0%) wall
1629 kB ( 0%) ggc
phase parsing : 1.32 ( 0%) usr 0.24 ( 2%) sys 1.56 ( 0%) wa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71937
--- Comment #8 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Frame: Ir Backtrace for Thread 1
[ 0] 85,518 brk (9503 x)
[ 1] 645,718 sbrk (9502 x)
[ 2] 787,930 __default_morecore (9498 x)
[ 3] 345,696,969 _int
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71931
--- Comment #1 from nsz at gcc dot gnu.org ---
a workaround is passing EXTRA_DEJAGNU_SITE_CONFIG=foo.exp to make, where
foo.exp has
set GCC_UNDER_TEST "build-dir/gcc/xgcc -Bbuild-dir/gcc --sysroot build-sysroot"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71937
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71937
--- Comment #10 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #9)
> So does -fno-tree-coalesce-vars help the compile time/memory here?
No. Even:
diff --git a/gcc/tree-ssa-coalesce.c b/gcc/tree-ssa-coalesce.c
index 34c3fa1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71898
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Wed Jul 20 11:16:47 2016
New Revision: 238513
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238513&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Properly handly PHI stmts in later_of_the_two (PR
PR middle-end/7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71898
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59281
Nadav Har'El changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nyh at math dot technion.ac.il
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71623
vehre at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68241
Bug 68241 depends on bug 71623, which changed state.
Bug 71623 Summary: [5/6/7 Regression] Segfault when allocating deferred-length
characters to size of a pointer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71623
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71947
Bug ID: 71947
Summary: x ^ y not folded to 0 if x == y
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69866
Thomas Preud'homme changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2016-02-19 00:00:00 |2016-7-20
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71688
--- Comment #9 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Jul 20 13:24:19 2016
New Revision: 238515
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238515&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix PR fortran/71688
2016-07-20 Martin Jambor
PR fortran/71
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71315
prathamesh3492 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||prathamesh3492 at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71688
--- Comment #10 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Jul 20 13:31:19 2016
New Revision: 238516
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238516&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix PR fortran/71688
2016-07-20 Martin Jambor
PR fortran/7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71315
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50060
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Jul 20 14:00:02 2016
New Revision: 238520
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238520&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/50060
* constexpr.c (cxx_eval_builtin_function_call
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71948
Bug ID: 71948
Summary: [avr] Make progmem work on reduced Tiny cores by
adding 0x4000 to symbols
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhance
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71909
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Jul 20 14:01:30 2016
New Revision: 238521
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238521&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71909
* parser.c (cp_parser_save_member_function_bo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71948
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||avr
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71909
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Jul 20 14:05:00 2016
New Revision: 238523
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238523&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71909
* parser.c (cp_parser_save_member_function_bo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69866
Thomas Preud'homme changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||5.4.1, 6.1.1, 7.0
--- Comment #6 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71909
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Jul 20 14:16:40 2016
New Revision: 238526
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238526&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71909
* parser.c (cp_parser_save_member_function_bo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71948
--- Comment #1 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
Author: gjl
Date: Wed Jul 20 14:12:16 2016
New Revision: 238525
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238525&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
Implement attribute progmem on reduced Tiny cores by adding
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71909
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Jul 20 14:32:46 2016
New Revision: 238527
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238527&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71909
* parser.c (cp_parser_save_member_function_bo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71909
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50060
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50060
--- Comment #11 from Paul A. Bristow ---
Thanks for all this, which looks helpful, but I am not able to use unreleased
compiler versions, so meanwhile I am working to use a workaround (to allow me
to see what other pitfalls lie ahead for the novi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65698
--- Comment #3 from Yuri Rumyantsev ---
I see that this bug was no considered for a while.
Here is my additional comment.
First of all, this test was extracted from bzip2 benchmark, mainGTU function.
The problem is that (1) tree optimizer collect
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56688
--- Comment #7 from Yuri Rumyantsev ---
I checked that GCC 7 compiler still does not vectorize loops in thin6d function
which is the only hottest function in 200.sixtrack benchmark.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71934
Rich Felker changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bugdal at aerifal dot cx
--- Comment #4 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71937
--- Comment #11 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
The excessive memory usage only happens when compiling without optimizations.
Using -O1 it stays below 2 GB, but takes minutes to finish.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71688
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71513
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69866
Thomas Preud'homme changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|5.3.0 |7.0
--- Comment #7 from Thomas Preu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71839
Anton Shterenlikht changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71947
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71949
Bug ID: 71949
Summary: ATOMIC_FLAG_INIT definition in stdatomic.h
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69004
--- Comment #16 from PeteVine ---
I've just read 4.9.4 is to be released soon - any chance of landing a fix for
this issue?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71950
Bug ID: 71950
Summary: std::ios_base::failure.what() returns irrelevant error
message
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66145
Shital Shah changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sytelus at gmail dot com
--- Comment #22 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71951
Bug ID: 71951
Summary: libgcc_s built with -fomit-frame-pointer on aarch64 is
broken
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71951
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Unwind code in lib gcc does uses the dwarf2 unwinding tables. So omit frame
pointer should not change anything.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71951
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Do you have an example? Because I ran with omit frame pointer all the time.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71951
--- Comment #3 from Timo Teräs ---
$ cat a.cpp <
int foo()
{
throw "Foo!";
}
int main ()
{
try {
foo();
}catch (const char* msg) {
std::cerr << msg << std::endl;
}
return 0;
}
EOF
$ gdb a
GNU gdb (GDB) 7.11.1
Copyrig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71951
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Can you try this on a glibc instead musl?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71951
--- Comment #5 from Timo Teräs ---
Not easily. It's musl, and using iterate phdr. Same build script works on x86,
x86_64 and armhf. It's only aarch64 misbehaving like this with omit frame
pointer. Any other suggestions what to try/how to debug fu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71876
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #8 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62096
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolut
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71951
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Timo Teräs from comment #5)
> Not easily. It's musl, and using iterate phdr. Same build script works on
> x86, x86_64 and armhf. It's only aarch64 misbehaving like this with omit
> frame pointer.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71858
--- Comment #7 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Wed Jul 20 18:42:11 2016
New Revision: 238538
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238538&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
C++ FE: handle misspelled identifiers and typenames
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70339
--- Comment #5 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Wed Jul 20 18:42:11 2016
New Revision: 238538
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238538&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
C++ FE: handle misspelled identifiers and typenames
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71876
--- Comment #9 from Bernd Edlinger ---
(In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #8)
> Light searching doesn't find anything useful for setjmp_syscall.
>
> savectx however still shows up in a variety of solaris searches. In fact,
> you can find
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71951
--- Comment #7 from Timo Teräs ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
> (In reply to Timo Teräs from comment #5)
> > Not easily. It's musl, and using iterate phdr. Same build script works on
> > x86, x86_64 and armhf. It's only aarch64 m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71876
--- Comment #10 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
No opinion on the "x" prefix. I think that was already in place when that code
was updated to support qsetjmp and savectx in the early 90s. I've never seen
the "x" versions in practice.
ANd yes, you're r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66145
--- Comment #23 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Boris Kolpackov from comment #21)
> Speaking of possible fixes, I had this crazy idea, not sure if it is
> technically possible though: what if libstdc++ throws some custom exception
> that de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37475
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Oops, I meant 382 is NAD
http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-closed.html#382
I'm not sure what (if anything) we need to do here though, someone needs to
re-analyze.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71876
--- Comment #11 from Bernd Edlinger ---
(In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #10)
> No opinion on the "x" prefix. I think that was already in place when that
> code was updated to support qsetjmp and savectx in the early 90s. I've
> never s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71952
Bug ID: 71952
Summary: [Coarray, F2008] Rejects valid coarray access with
array partref
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71121
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54367
Bug 54367 depends on bug 70942, which changed state.
Bug 70942 Summary: [6/7 Regression] [c++14] Incorrect deduction of generic
lambda `auto&&` parameter
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70942
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70972
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tuwwcn at gmail dot com
--- Comment #9 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70845
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71117
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vittorio.romeo at outlook dot
com
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70942
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70781
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71896
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71953
Bug ID: 71953
Summary: ICE using sanitizers with PCH
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71463
--- Comment #8 from Milian Wolff ---
As an interested bystander, may I ask: If the attribute is part of the type,
shouldn't it then be transferred via decltype() and then also used in the
template to trigger the warning there? To me, the example
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71954
Bug ID: 71954
Summary: template partial specialization for constexpr error
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71463
--- Comment #9 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Milian Wolff from comment #8)
> As an interested bystander, may I ask: If the attribute is part of the type,
> shouldn't it then be transferred via decltype() and then also used in the
> template
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71946
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Works for me on aarch64-linux-gnu with:
GNU C++14 (GCC) version 7.0.0 20160717 (experimental)
(aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu)
Maybe provide a preprocessed source which fails.
For me it expands to:
# 6 "t.c" 3 4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71946
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Looks like x86 has a special select.h in glibc :).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67565
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jul 21 06:05:24 2016
New Revision: 238558
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=238558&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Improving concepts performance and diagnostics.
PR c++/67
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71941
thakkinen at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
1 - 100 of 149 matches
Mail list logo
