https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78540
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 40342
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40342&action=edit
gcc6-pr78540-test.patch
Oops, forgot in 6.x and earlier -Wno-psabi doesn't work for ppc*. Does this
fix the is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78817
--- Comment #3 from Segher Boessenkool ---
It is a warning (as well as a bootstrap comparison error) on powerpc64-linux.
You tested on powerpc64le-linux, different animal.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78817
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Host|powerpc64le-*-linux |
--- Comment #4 from Andreas Schwab --
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78763
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78812
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78798
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78817
--- Comment #5 from Andreas Schwab ---
Also broken on ia64.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22141
--- Comment #40 from etienne_lorrain at yahoo dot fr ---
Following my comment No 17, the optimisation could also be done for reads - we
still have (https://gcc.godbolt.org/ -O2 -m32) that:
struct S
{
char a;
char b;
char c;
char d;
} u, v;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78817
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22141
--- Comment #41 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to etienne_lorrain from comment #40)
> Following my comment No 17, the optimisation could also be done for reads -
> we still have (https://gcc.godbolt.org/ -O2 -m32) that:
> struct S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59161
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
That seems quite arbitrary and inconsistent. In other contexts if I return a
gdb.Value it gets stringified as expected, e.g the
StdListPrinter._iterator.__next__ method does:
return ('[%d]' % count, va
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78819
Bug ID: 78819
Summary: [7 Regression] Wrong code with VRP caused by register
assertions along default switch labels
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59161
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This behaviour effectively means pretty printers for generic C++ types must
never return gdb.Value from to_string() because they have no idea if GDB's
default stringification will be sane. An optional can't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78819
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78819
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78819
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78821
Bug ID: 78821
Summary: GCC7: Copying whole 32 bits structure field by field
not optimised into copying whole 32 bits at once
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22141
--- Comment #42 from etienne_lorrain at yahoo dot fr ---
Separate Bug 78821 has been successfully created following comment 41
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24177
etienne_lorrain at yahoo dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14295
Bug 14295 depends on bug 24177, which changed state.
Bug 24177 Summary: function returning structure produce very long/slow assembly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24177
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59161
--- Comment #8 from Pedro Alves ---
Sounds like Paul's original patch may have introduced an undesired conflation.
AFAICS, options.addressprint's exists to implement "set print address on/off",
which had for original motivation, from the manual:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78812
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59161
--- Comment #9 from Pedro Alves ---
> Sounds like Paul's original patch may have introduced an undesired
> conflation. AFAICS, options.addressprint's exists to implement "set print
> address on/off", which had for original motivation, from the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39456
etienne_lorrain at yahoo dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77484
--- Comment #12 from wilco at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to wilco from comment #10)
> (In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #9)
> > Created attachment 40217 [details]
> > predict
> >
> > Hi,
> > here is patch adding the polymorphic case, too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4
etienne_lorrain at yahoo dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78817
Franz Sirl changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sirl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78800
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|un
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78797
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to paul.richard.tho...@gmail.com from comment #5)
> I do apologise, it seems that Mr Reid did not do his usual update. We
> will have to work from the draft standard itself.
Ok. Btw, the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78797
--- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #6)
> Ok. Btw, the draft version of the F15 standard linked from the gfortran wiki
> is:
>
> http://j3-fortran.org/doc/year/15/15-007.pdf
>
> (from December 2014).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59161
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Thu Dec 15 13:25:22 2016
New Revision: 243690
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243690&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR59161 make pretty printers always return strings
PR libstdc++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59161
--- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I've forced the relevant printers to convert to a string explicitly, so now you
always get the address, which seems better than {ref = }
So I think the libstdc++ part is fixed, do we want a GDB bug to con
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59161
--- Comment #12 from Pedro Alves ---
> So I think the libstdc++ part is fixed,
Thanks. TBC, given the pointer example in comment #9, I think GDB's implicit
use of options.addressprint=off for pretty printers is a clear GDB bug. I
think GDB sh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78800
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
--- Comment #2 from janus
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78800
--- Comment #1 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Thu Dec 15 14:07:51 2016
New Revision: 243691
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243691&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-12-15 Janus Weil
PR fortran/78800
* int
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59170
--- Comment #16 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Thu Dec 15 14:13:36 2016
New Revision: 243692
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243692&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR59170 make pretty printers check for singular iterators
PR li
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78800
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59874
--- Comment #15 from Allan Jensen ---
Yes, the patch works and it also evaluates at compile time.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59170
--- Comment #17 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I've added some more checks for non-debug iterators.
The only thing remaining is to add checks for debug iterators to detect when
they are past-the-end.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78817
--- Comment #8 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
trippels@gcc2-power8 linux % cat sm_ftl.i
int sm_read_sector_zone;
int *sm_read_sector_buffer = &sm_read_sector_zone;
int sm_read_sector() {
__builtin_memset(sm_read_sector_buffer, 0, 1);
again:
if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78817
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78817
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Note, users that want this to be diagnosed reliably already can use
-fsanitize={returns-,}nonnull-attribute
So I think it is better to warn only about the obvious cases with very low
false positive rate, and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77834
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Dec 15 15:11:05 2016
New Revision: 243693
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243693&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/78540
* gcc.dg/pr78540.c: Add -w to dg-opti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78540
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Dec 15 15:11:05 2016
New Revision: 243693
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243693&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/78540
* gcc.dg/pr78540.c: Add -w to dg-opti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71321
Bernd Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernds at gcc dot gnu.org
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78817
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Looking at the gengtype.c case, I think it is quite common case.
static inline const char*
get_input_file_name (const input_file *inpf)
{
if (inpf)
return inpf->inpname;
return NULL;
}
const char
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78812
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The problem is that the hoisting code seems to assume the hoisting would be
performed at the end of a bb, but that is not what insert_insn_end_basic_block
will then actually do. But by the time insert_insn_e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78763
--- Comment #8 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
Here is a test case that recreates the problem.
package p
import (
"unsafe"
)
func F() int {
if unsafe.Sizeof(0) == 8 {
return 8
}
return 0
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78822
Bug ID: 78822
Summary: [cleanup] replace static char buffers by std:string
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78811
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Thu Dec 15 18:05:05 2016
New Revision: 243721
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243721&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix use-after-free lexing unterminated raw strings (PR preprocessor/788
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78680
--- Comment #7 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Thu Dec 15 18:05:05 2016
New Revision: 243721
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243721&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix use-after-free lexing unterminated raw strings (PR preprocessor/788
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78811
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78540
Bill Seurer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||seurer at linux dot
vnet.ibm.com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78819
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Run-time testcase:
__attribute__((noinline, noclone)) void
foo (int argc)
{
if (argc <= 0 || argc > 3)
return;
switch (argc)
{
case 1:
case 3:
if (argc != 3)
__builtin_abor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78718
--- Comment #3 from Jim MacArthur ---
It looks to me like the assertion failure is because the symbol in the argument
expression doesn't have the attr.referenced bit set. resolve_actual_arglist
replaces the symtree in the 'z' expression when it f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78787
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78787
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #3)
> Created attachment 40343 [details]
> Hack to debug diagnostic-color.c
$ ./xgcc -B. -O2 -Wall -Wextra -flto /home/david/coding-3/gcc-git-clean/src/z.c
should_colo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78658
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78639
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77485
--- Comment #10 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
[0.00%]:
MEM[(char[170] *)& + 30B] = {};
.buf[0] = 48;
[ ... ]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78823
Bug ID: 78823
Summary: Poor code on PowerPC when moving SFmode values between
GPRs and vector registers
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77829
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77585
--- Comment #3 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Author: nathan
Date: Thu Dec 15 19:50:25 2016
New Revision: 243723
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243723&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/77585
* pt.c (instantiate_decl): Push to class sc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77585
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78662
--- Comment #2 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Status. This is one of those where I was looking at the solution and did not
see it for a while. Then it pops into view. The strings are stored with the
double quotes and passed that way to the write routines
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64380
--- Comment #1 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
So the missed dead stores are due to DSE's inability to walk through the loop
in ReleaseAll. As a result stores occurring prior to that loop can't be
discovered as dead.
For reference, here's an example th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61912
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #2 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61912
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||petschy at gmail dot com
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77485
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78798
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Thu Dec 15 20:54:18 2016
New Revision: 243726
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243726&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-12-15 Janus Weil
PR fortran/78798
* gfo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78817
--- Comment #12 from Martin Sebor ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #3)
> It is a warning (as well as a bootstrap comparison error) on powerpc64-linux.
> You tested on powerpc64le-linux, different animal.
I missed that. But I'm n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78771
--- Comment #2 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Created attachment 40345
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40345&action=edit
simpler testcase
the deletedness of the template ctor is a red herring. Also the templatedness
of the base cl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36602
Bug 36602 depends on bug 16427, which changed state.
Bug 16427 Summary: dead memset not optimized away
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16427
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16427
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78817
--- Comment #13 from Martin Sebor ---
(In reply to Franz Sirl from comment #7)
> And on x86_64 a profiledbootstrap with --enable-checking=yes fails like this:
I have just confirmed this by doing the same. My profiledbootstrap shows the
followin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78154
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77573
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71110
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78817
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29858
Bug 29858 depends on bug 30119, which changed state.
Bug 30119 Summary: libjava testsuite output is erratic and unhelpful
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30119
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29842
Bug 29842 depends on bug 30119, which changed state.
Bug 30119 Summary: libjava testsuite output is erratic and unhelpful
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30119
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30119
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30026
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78798
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Looking through gfortran.h, some more candidates which could be converted:
int gfc_at_end (void);
int gfc_at_eof (void);
int gfc_at_bol (void);
int gfc_at_eol (void);
int gfc_check_include (void);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78824
Bug ID: 78824
Summary: multiple add should in my opinion be optimized to
multiplication
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78823
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc64-linux-gnu,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78824
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Works for me on aarch64-linux-gnu with GCC 5.4 and above:
main:
adrpx1, nvx8
adrpx2, y
mov w0, 0
ldrbw1, [x1, #:lo12:nvx8]
lsl w1, w1, 4
str
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78825
Bug ID: 78825
Summary: missing error for template partial specialization
using template alias type
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78824
--- Comment #2 from Piotr ---
avr-gcc actually
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78764
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78825
--- Comment #1 from Maciej Załucki ---
My first thought was that it's bug introduced with N3651 support
(C++14 variable templates) to GCC 5 and partially fixed in GCC 5.2.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71216
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rin at NetBSD dot org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78764
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78822
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78826
Bug ID: 78826
Summary: jump bypasses non-POD
Product: gcc
Version: 6.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: una
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78826
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note there might be a rule about non trivial constructors in there too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78763
--- Comment #9 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ian
Date: Thu Dec 15 22:47:43 2016
New Revision: 243729
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243729&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR go/78763
compiler: call determine_types even for con
version 7.0.0 20161215 (experimental) [trunk revision 243680] (GCC)
COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS='-v' '-o' 'charlen_03' '-mmacosx-version-min=10.11.6'
'-asm_macosx_version_min=10.11' '-shared-libgcc' '-mtune=core2'
/usr/local/libexec/gcc/x86_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78746
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||physiker at toast2 dot net
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78827
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
1 - 100 of 111 matches
Mail list logo
