https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90176
Bug ID: 90176
Summary: diagnostics should generally contain underscore only
inside quotes
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85164
--- Comment #11 from Vittorio Zecca ---
After applying your fixes I still have overflow compiling the following
// Must be compiled with nonzero optimization
//../../gcc/gcc/poly-int.h:1095:5: runtime error: signed integer
overflow: 922337203685
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90177
Bug ID: 90177
Summary: nds32: diagnostic says "must be enable"
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90168
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89093
--- Comment #75 from Jakub Jelinek ---
It failed for me as well. And a GCC version check won't really help when using
earlier GCC 9 snapshot as system compiler (though, admittedly that isn't
supported).
Another option would be to define the attr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90168
--- Comment #2 from Feng Xue ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #1)
> > Supposed a function as the following, in which 'cond', 'S1' and 'S2' are
> > completely irrelevant, means they do not access same variables(in term of
> > RA, they o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81598
Julien Blanc changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||julien.blanc at sprinte dot eu
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90108
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Apr 19 08:24:05 2019
New Revision: 270453
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270453&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/90108
* c-decl.c (merge_decls): If remove is main v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90178
Bug ID: 90178
Summary: Missed optimization: duplicated terminal basic block
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90168
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Version|unknown
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67944
Alex Reinking changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90176
--- Comment #1 from Roland Illig ---
Created attachment 46204
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46204&action=edit
linter ported to using polib
I rewrote the linter to use polib. As this is a complete rewrite, a diff would
be l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89093
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #46202|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90176
Roland Illig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #46204|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90118
--- Comment #6 from Christophe Lyon ---
Author: clyon
Date: Fri Apr 19 09:08:49 2019
New Revision: 270454
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270454&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR translation/90118 Missing space between words
2019-04-19 Christophe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90045
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #13
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90119
--- Comment #4 from Roland Illig ---
Created attachment 46207
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46207&action=edit
linter that checks diagnostics that only differ in placeholder content
Using polib, writing the linter was not t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82920
--- Comment #5 from Iain Sandoe ---
Created attachment 46208
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46208&action=edit
Patch for codegen and testsuite
This is not just a testsuite issue, there are multiple places where incorrect
cod
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82920
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ABI, wrong-code
--- Comment #6 from Iain S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90148
--- Comment #3 from Roland Illig ---
From rs6000/linux64.h:
error ("%<-mcmodel incompatible with other toc options%>"); \
The closing quote should be directly behind the "-mcmodel".
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90179
Bug ID: 90179
Summary: typo in diagnostic for unrecognized control register
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90148
--- Comment #4 from Roland Illig ---
From rx.c:
error ("use %<__builtin_rx_mvtc%> (0, ... ) to write arbitrary values to
PSW");
The closing quote should be after the closing parenthesis.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90180
Bug ID: 90180
Summary: ambiguous diagnostic for "out of range"
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: translation
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90180
--- Comment #1 from Roland Illig ---
While here, the two diagnostics in s390_const_operand_ok are very similar. It
would be nice if the first of them had the same text as the second one, passing
the 0 as an argument.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90181
Bug ID: 90181
Summary: Feature request: provide a way to explicitly select
specific named registers in constraints
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90164
--- Comment #2 from Roland Illig ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #1)
> Confirmed. There seems to be little consistency between "changes" and "has
> changed" -- it's 11 vs 6.
To me it looks completely consistent.
If something changed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89888
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Apr 19 11:56:07 2019
New Revision: 270455
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270455&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/89888
* c-common.h (c_add_case_label): Remove orig_ty
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90138
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Apr 19 11:57:23 2019
New Revision: 270456
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270456&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/90138
* pt.c (process_template_parm): Set decl to p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90139
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Apr 19 11:58:11 2019
New Revision: 270457
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270457&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/90139
* tree-outof-ssa.c (get_temp_reg): If
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90108
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||9.0
Known to fail|9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89888
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[7/8/9 Regression] When |[7/8 Regression] When
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90139
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90138
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90181
--- Comment #1 from Andreas Schwab ---
x86 doesn't support this either. It just happens to have a few register
classes that consist of a single register, but only because of ISA constraints.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60591
Jonny Grant changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jg at jguk dot org
--- Comment #3 from Jon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60591
--- Comment #4 from Jonny Grant ---
Clang++ gives a nice error, can gcc improve to also make it clear it is an
enum?
-Wall -Wconversion -Wextra
1
Find
x86-64 clang (trunk) - 349ms
#1 with x86-64 clang (trunk)
:8:9: error: assigning to 'enum h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90163
--- Comment #2 from Daniel Santos ---
Yes, this is mine. Does this only become untranslatable when feature is
"static call chains"?
iiuc, static call chains are only used with nested functions (a GNU C
extension) and closure functions -- is thi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90182
Bug ID: 90182
Summary: missing space in multiline string literal
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: translati
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90183
Bug ID: 90183
Summary: ambiguous diagnostics "only available with"
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: transla
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90184
Bug ID: 90184
Summary: confusing diagnostic "attribute using prefix"
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90185
Bug ID: 90185
Summary: diagnostic "argument pack of characters" sounds like a
complaint
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90118
--- Comment #7 from Christophe Lyon ---
(In reply to Roland Illig from comment #5)
> It would be good if the check-internal-format-escaping.py linter would
> actually output what is wrong in the msgid. The number of checks will
> increase as I'm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89900
--- Comment #8 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Fri Apr 19 15:36:20 2019
New Revision: 270459
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270459&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
/cp
2019-04-19 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/89900
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90186
Bug ID: 90186
Summary: optimizing options -O1 and -O2 produce different
results
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85164
--- Comment #12 from Vittorio Zecca ---
Here are two more test cases with undefined behaviour in poly-int.h
Must be compiled with nonzero optimization
cat gccerr73.c
// must be compiled with nonzero optimization
// ../../gcc/gcc/poly-int.h:753:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89923
--- Comment #6 from Tom Honermann ---
(In reply to jos...@codesourcery.com from comment #5)
> We (GCC) don't control printf;
I know, by "we" I meant the C and C++ standards community.
> the format checking should match what the
> actual libc s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81058
--- Comment #5 from Iain Sandoe ---
Created attachment 46210
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46210&action=edit
Patch for testing
Darwin doesn't support non-pic for user-space programs, so these tests fail
(and the codeine is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90164
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor ---
Agreed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90180
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90187
Bug ID: 90187
Summary: ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2304 x86_64
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90178
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Missed optimization:|Missed optimization:
|duplic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88055
--- Comment #10 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Fri Apr 19 16:58:01 2019
New Revision: 270460
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270460&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
tree-call-cdce: If !HONOR_NANS do not make code with NaNs (PR88055)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88055
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84369
--- Comment #7 from pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: pthaugen
Date: Fri Apr 19 17:14:57 2019
New Revision: 270461
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270461&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport from mainline:
2019-04-16 Pat Ha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90118
--- Comment #8 from Roland Illig ---
(In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #7)
> Do you mean something like that?
>
> if p.startswith('-'):
> if len(p) >= 2 and (p[1].isalpha() and p != '-INF'):
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90178
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90171
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90188
Bug ID: 90188
Summary: ambiguous diagnostic "may not"
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90183
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Currently there's nothing later than c++2a so it's correct. To be future proof
it could say "or later" but that's a bit misleading, as there is (currently)
nothing later.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90181
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90184
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
But is it confusing in context when the diagnostic points to a piece of code
saying [[using gnu: noinline]] ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90185
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90178
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Host||ubizjak at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 from H
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90148
--- Comment #5 from Roland Illig ---
From fortran/intrinsic.c:
gfc_warning_now (OPT_Wintrinsics_std, "The intrinsic %qs at %L is not "
"included in the selected standard but %s and %qs
will"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90189
Bug ID: 90189
Summary: Spurious "error: parameter packs not expanded" when a
dependent name coincides
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
URL: https://godbolt.org/z/UuwYK4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90178
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
It is caused by r266358.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90184
--- Comment #2 from Roland Illig ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> But is it confusing in context when the diagnostic points to a piece of code
> saying [[using gnu: noinline]] ?
Yes, it is. I just had a look at gen-attrs-66.C,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90183
--- Comment #2 from Roland Illig ---
The same diagnostic also appears for %<-std=c++-17%> and several others, and
these are in the past. Are the options from these standard only available in
that particular version of the standard? I don't guess
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90163
--- Comment #3 from Roland Illig ---
(In reply to Daniel Santos from comment #2)
> Yes, this is mine. Does this only become untranslatable when feature is
> "static call chains"?
In German, this might result in:
%<-mcall-ms2sysv-xlogues%> ist
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90178
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
The removed insn is insn 35 in:
;; basic block 8, loop depth 0, count 114863532 (estimated locally), maybe hot
;; prev block 7, next block 1, flags: (REACHABLE, HOT_PARTITION, RTL)
;; pred: 7 [always] cou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90178
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu ---
zveroupper pass drops:
(insn 36 37 51 8 (use (reg/i:DI 0 ax)) "x.i":8:1 -1
(nil))
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90176
Roland Illig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #46206|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90181
--- Comment #3 from nfxjfg at googlemail dot com ---
Yes, it's documented this way, but it makes it appear all kinds of fragile. For
one, I normally expect that the compiler will reorder and interleave any
statements in my code (because that's wha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90190
Bug ID: 90190
Summary: [8/9 regression] CTAD confuses with {one element}
initializer_list
Product: gcc
Version: 8.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
df,fold,rtl,extra
--enable-languages=c,c++,lto --disable-multilib --enable-shared
--enable-threads=posix --enable-__cxa_atexit --enable-gnu-unique-object
--enable-linker-build-id --with-linker-hash-style=gnu --enable-plugin
--enable-initfini-array --with-isl --enable-offload-targets=nvptx-none
--without-cuda-driver --enable-gnu-indirect-function --with-tune=native
Thread model: posix
gcc version 9.0.1 20190419 (experimental) [trunk revision 270458] (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90192
Bug ID: 90192
Summary: std::vector::resize() requires more than the
CopyInsertable
Product: gcc
Version: 8.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90166
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P5 |P4
Assignee|unassign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90178
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #3)
> It is caused by r266358.
The nop INSN can be removed by split_all_insns later:
if (INSN_P (insn))
{
rtx set = single_set (insn);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90144
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90190
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90193
Bug ID: 90193
Summary: asm goto with TLS "m" input operand generates
incorrect assembler in O1 and O2
Product: gcc
Version: 8.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90169
--- Comment #2 from menospaamthereaper at hotmail dot com ---
(In reply to kargl from comment #1)
> The problem is fixed on trunk. Don't know if anyone intends to back port.
> Doubt it as no one has done so.
>
> PR 78578 is irrelevant as the ind
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90169
--- Comment #3 from menospaamthereaper at hotmail dot com ---
Also why was this bug marked as resolved / invalid? It still exists for 7.3.0
whether or not it will be resolved, and is rather serious.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32605
Jed Brown changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jed at 59A2 dot org
--- Comment #5 from Jed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90169
--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to menospaamthereaper from comment #2)
> (In reply to kargl from comment #1)
> > The problem is fixed on trunk. Don't know if anyone intends to back port.
> > Doubt it as no one has done
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90169
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |WONTFIX
--- Comment #5 from ka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90190
--- Comment #1 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Sat Apr 20 06:18:39 2019
New Revision: 270468
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270468&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/90190 - CTAD with list-constructor.
The passage quoted tal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90171
--- Comment #1 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Sat Apr 20 06:18:30 2019
New Revision: 270467
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270467&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/90171 - ICE with destroying delete with size_t parm.
The p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90171
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90169
--- Comment #6 from menospaamthereaper at hotmail dot com ---
Thank you for the update and your hard work, kargl.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90193
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-*, i?86-*-*
Sta
91 matches
Mail list logo
