https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87273
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Version|unknown
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87276
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87188
--- Comment #22 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to dave.anglin from comment #21)
> On 2018-09-09 2:46 PM, rguenther at suse dot de wrote:
> > In the last patch you replace arg0 || arg1 with arg0 & & arg1, that looks
> > wrong. Otherwise the pat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87282
--- Comment #1 from delrieutheo at gmail dot com ---
Note that it fails with operator-=(void*, void*) as well.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87245
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86916
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|x86_64-apple-darwin15 |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87246
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |8.2.1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87256
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
> For the above case, there are during the recursion 77608 synth_mult calls,
> which might be ok, so indeed better hashing would help, but 10311 is too
> large and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87260
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.3
Summary|[8 Regression] g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87263
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Version|unknown
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87266
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87267
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87268
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87271
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
I wonder if there's a way to trace all malloc/realloc/free calls as well
(possibly simply via breakpoints and doing continue in their commands, logging
the result).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87280
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87284
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87285
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87260
--- Comment #2 from Matthias Klose ---
the patch fixes the issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87172
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87248
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Sep 12 09:18:55 2018
New Revision: 264230
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264230&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/87248
* fold-const.c (fold_ternary_loc) : Ve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87248
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Sep 12 09:21:03 2018
New Revision: 264231
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264231&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/87248
* fold-const.c (fold_ternary_loc) : Ve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86844
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Sep 12 09:25:07 2018
New Revision: 264232
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264232&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/86844
* gimple-ssa-store-merging.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85871
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85774
--- Comment #8 from Martin Liška ---
Jakub: PING^2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86078
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85774
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
So, can't we somewhere in:
/* Find best representative of the partition.
Prefer those with DECL_NAME, even better
satisfying asan_protect_stack_decl predicate.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87286
Bug ID: 87286
Summary: ICE on vectors of enums
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unass
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87267
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87266
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
*** Bug 87267 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87280
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Here we're running into the not executable but limited region where we marked
not only backedges as executable but also destination BBs as reachable. Things
go
downhill here because we end up with with all
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87271
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87271
--- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 12 Sep 2018, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87271
>
> Jakub Jelinek changed:
>
>What|Removed |Added
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87266
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87266
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Sep 12 12:14:27 2018
New Revision: 264237
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264237&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-09-12 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/87266
3
/home/eric/build/gcc-8-branch/native/gcc/gnatmake version 8.2.1 20180912
[gcc-8-branch revision 264232]
eric@polaris:~/build/gcc-8-branch/native> gcc/xgcc -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcc/xgcc
Target: x86_64-suse-linux
Configured with: /home/eric/svn/gcc-8-branch/config
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87263
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
This is because dominated_by_p_w_unex called by rpo_elim::eliminate_avail is
looking at edges we have not yet processed. This might be also an issue when
iterating because we may "leak" previous iteration s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86554
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87276
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87134
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87134
--- Comment #14 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #13)
> I have random SIGBUS errors on SPARC/Solaris 10 and 11 machines.
Could you please run compiler in valgrind?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87134
--- Comment #15 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Could you please run compiler in valgrind?
On SPARC/Solaris?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87134
--- Comment #16 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #15)
> > Could you please run compiler in valgrind?
>
> On SPARC/Solaris?
Yes please, on an arbitrary input you see the segbus/segfault.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87220
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87242
--- Comment #4 from Greg Minshall ---
hi. sorry for the delay. i'm creduce'ing and will upload.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87134
--- Comment #17 from Eric Botcazou ---
> > On SPARC/Solaris?
>
> Yes please, on an arbitrary input you see the segbus/segfault.
It was a rhetorical question, there is no valgrind on this platform... But
I'll debug the issue at some point, no w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87280
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87134
--- Comment #18 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #17 from Eric Botcazou ---
>> > On SPARC/Solaris?
>>
>> Yes please, on an arbitrary input you see the segbus/segfault.
>
> It was a rhetorical question, there is no valgr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87280
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Sep 12 14:03:21 2018
New Revision: 264241
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264241&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-09-12 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/87280
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87287
Bug ID: 87287
Summary: Move signed (x % pow2) == 0 optimization to gimple
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87287
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87287
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
With the to be posted patch, f1 and f3 remains the same, f2 and f4 improves:
- movl%edi, %eax
- sarl$31, %eax
- shrl$28, %eax
- addl%eax, %edi
+ xorl%eax, %ea
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87287
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 44681
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44681&action=edit
gcc9-pr87287.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87288
Bug ID: 87288
Summary: Segfault after const_cast with "-O2
-ftree-loop-vectorize" but _without_ "-mavx"
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87288
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-* i?86-*-*
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87288
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86336
--- Comment #3 from jules at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jules
Date: Wed Sep 12 15:21:19 2018
New Revision: 264244
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264244&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[OpenACC] C++ reference mapping
2018-09-09 Cesar Philippidis
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87220
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87289
Bug ID: 87289
Summary: jdk11 plinux compiled with gcc 7.3 doesn't work with
NativeImageBuffer
Product: gcc
Version: 7.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87289
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87242
--- Comment #5 from Greg Minshall ---
Created attachment 44684
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44684&action=edit
creduce'd (but, only partly) test case.
module_intern() is the function i creduce'd on (my creduce "interesting
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87220
--- Comment #5 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Eric, can you please contribute a documentation patch that would explain
> what -fstack-check is designed to do? Existing documentation does not say
> anything about the extra page. Is it supposed to be use
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86771
--- Comment #23 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Wed Sep 12 16:23:01 2018
New Revision: 264245
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264245&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport PR86771 fix to 8
2018-09-12 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86771
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87290
Bug ID: 87290
Summary: Optimize signed x % pow2p == cst
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87290
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87242
rpluim at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rpluim at gmail dot com
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87289
--- Comment #2 from pdbain at ca dot ibm.com ---
Created attachment 44685
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44685&action=edit
Bad version of jnicsup
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87289
--- Comment #3 from pdbain at ca dot ibm.com ---
Created attachment 44686
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44686&action=edit
Good version of jnicsup
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87289
--- Comment #4 from pdbain at ca dot ibm.com ---
Compiler command line:
/usr/bin/g++ -save-temps -DOPENJ9_BUILD -O3 -U_FORTIFY_SOURCE
-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=1 -fno-exceptions -fno-rtti -fno-threadsafe-statics -g
-DLINUX -D_REENTRANT -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87242
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65337
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||minshall at acm dot org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87290
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 44687
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44687&action=edit
gcc9-pr87290.patch
Untested patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87289
--- Comment #5 from pdbain at ca dot ibm.com ---
The compiler trips on this part of jnicsup.cpp (ca. line 500):
#ifdef J9VM_INTERP_FLOAT_SUPPORT
case 'F':
/* float type */
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87220
--- Comment #6 from Rich Felker ---
Eric, even accepting the purpose in 1, what I described in 2 seems like a bug.
If it needs an extra page past what's actually used, it needs to make one probe
in the last-used page to ensure it doesn't jump a g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87220
--- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Eric, even accepting the purpose in 1, what I described in 2 seems like a
> bug. If it needs an extra page past what's actually used, it needs to make
> one probe in the last-used page to ensure it doesn't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86989
--- Comment #4 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Wed Sep 12 17:58:31 2018
New Revision: 264246
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264246&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport patch for PR86989 to 8
2018-09-12 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86989
--- Comment #5 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Wed Sep 12 18:01:11 2018
New Revision: 264247
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264247&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport patch for PR86989 to 7
2018-09-12 Segher Boessenkool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86989
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87289
--- Comment #6 from pdbain at ca dot ibm.com ---
Created attachment 44688
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44688&action=edit
Reworked code without goto across cases
This version works.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87291
Bug ID: 87291
Summary: Add support for inline asm to libgccjit
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: jit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82853
--- Comment #30 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Sep 12 18:28:20 2018
New Revision: 264248
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264248&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/82853
* expr.h (maybe_optimize_mod_cmp): De
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87188
--- Comment #23 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2018-09-12 4:03 AM, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> --- Comment #22 from Richard Biener ---
> (In reply to dave.anglin from comment #21)
>> On 2018-09-09 2:46 PM, rguenther at suse dot d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87291
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
Feature requests like this are fine here (though I make no guarantees about
actually implementing them).
Any thoughts on what the API should look like?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87284
--- Comment #1 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Wed Sep 12 18:33:13 2018
New Revision: 264249
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264249&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-09-12 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/87284
* trans-expr.c (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85110
--- Comment #8 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Wed Sep 12 18:50:08 2018
New Revision: 264250
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264250&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
C++: special-case single non-viable candidate (more PR c++/85110)
I br
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87284
--- Comment #2 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Wed Sep 12 18:53:50 2018
New Revision: 264251
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264251&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2018-09-12 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/87284
* trans-expr.c (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87289
--- Comment #7 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Do things work if you add the -fno-strict-aliasing compiler flag?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87093
--- Comment #5 from ville at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ville
Date: Wed Sep 12 21:10:43 2018
New Revision: 264253
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264253&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/87093
gcc/cp
PR c++/87093
* method.c (constructible_exp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87093
--- Comment #6 from ville at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ville
Date: Wed Sep 12 21:43:49 2018
New Revision: 264254
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264254&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/87093
Backport from mainline
2018-09-13 Ville Voutilain
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87093
Ville Voutilainen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87288
--- Comment #3 from bin cheng ---
Sorry for the breakage, will investigate this soon. Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87289
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87292
Bug ID: 87292
Summary: Warnings with Bit Fields
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87292
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I think the second is correct but I dont know the exact rules about enum
classes; are they unsigned by default? I know normal emuns are signed by
default.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87292
--- Comment #2 from Nuno Gonçalves ---
Not the case since, same warning if:
enum class Bool : uint8_t {False=0, True=1}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87292
--- Comment #3 from Nuno Gonçalves ---
Also to add, this could be suppressed if
enum class Bool : bool{False=0, True=1};
So a better example is for a 2 bit BitField:
enum class Nr : uint8_t{Zero=0, One=1, Two=2, Three=3};
struct{
Nr v:2;
96 matches
Mail list logo
