https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91369
--- Comment #24 from Toni Neubert ---
Great thank you.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92772
--- Comment #2 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> Looks like cond-reduction cannot handle fully masked loops unless we'd
> somehow mask the condition operation itself?
Yeah, looks like it. We'd
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92754
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus ---
Patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-12/msg00153.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92756
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Dec 4 08:47:13 2019
New Revision: 278956
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278956&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR fortran/92756
* trans-openmp.c (gfc_trans_omp_teams): W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92398
--- Comment #10 from luoxhu at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: luoxhu
Revision: 278890
Modified property: svn:log
Modified: svn:log at Wed Dec 4 08:50:33 2019
--
--- svn:log
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92756
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10 Regression] ICE in|[9 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92788
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92788
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92784
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92789
Bug ID: 92789
Summary: Non-obvious ?: behaviour with structurally equivalent
types
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92790
Bug ID: 92790
Summary: [OpenACC] declare device_resident - Fortran common
blocks not handled /
libgomp.oacc-fortran/declare-5.f90 fails
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92734
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Dec 4 09:38:48 2019
New Revision: 278958
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278958&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/92734
* match.pd ((A +- B) - A -> +-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92788
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92791
Bug ID: 92791
Summary: [10 Regression] ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2311
since r278645
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92791
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92768
--- Comment #14 from Richard Biener ---
So I think it's unfortunate that we break testcases like this using _mm_xor_ps
with -ffast-math since users expect the mask to not be treated as signed
zero/zero. The error here obviously lies in the use o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92768
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
For SSE2+, the code can of course use _mm_xor_si128 instead and
_mm_castsi128_ps/_mm_castps_si128, but for SSE that is not an option.
And not really sure what can be done there, the _mm_xor_ps arguments are
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92772
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Stubbs ---
The GCN architecture can handle the masking, but I don't know how we'd
represent or apply that in the middle end?
I can probably implement extract_last, and that might be more efficient, but I
don't see how
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92772
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
IIRC AVX512 also implements fully masked loops so the testcase should fail
there, too, if we adjust N accordingly (to 15 or 31). Hmm, can't seem to
trigger
the fully masked support here, maybe I misremember
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92788
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
So, what happens is that we have a bb like:
[local count: 7102878]:
# __result_2 = PHI <_10(3)>
*this_4(D).D.3185._M_impl.D.3135._M_finish = __result_2;
with EH and normal successor edges.
dom_opt_dom_walker
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92772
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
And the issue is to be fixed in vect_create_epilog_for_reduction where
we create the index IV:
/* For cond reductions we want to create a new vector (INDEX_COND_EXPR)
which is updated with the curren
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92782
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92780
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92779
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91971
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|ASSIGNED
Assignee|qinzhao at gc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92757
--- Comment #10 from Ricardo Abreu ---
> Usually CLI applications don't have as many switches as GCC with as many
> non-trivial interactions between them.
True, but I am not sure I understand your point. To me that sounds like all the
more reas
Assignee: ibuclaw at gdcproject dot org
Reporter: doko at debian dot org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 47415
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47415&action=edit
symbols diff
the current trunk 20191204 dropped two symbols from the shared
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92793
Bug ID: 92793
Summary: Fortran Location Data for Diagnostic lacks the column
number – when passing on to ME
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92781
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92786
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Yes, this is
https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/VerboseDiagnostics#missing_static_const_definition
In C++17 the static member is implicitly 'inline' which means the declaration
with an initializer is also a definiti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92772
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Stubbs ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> Btw, isn't the issue that the reduction looks at all lanes? That is,
> I think the code simply assumes that for fully masked loops at least
> one iteration is p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92794
Bug ID: 92794
Summary: [10 Regression] ICE in decide_about_value, at
ipa-cp.c:5186
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92754
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus ---
Author: burnus
Date: Wed Dec 4 12:19:55 2019
New Revision: 278961
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278961&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fortran] PR92754 - fix an issue with resolving intrinsic functions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92754
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92794
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
Status|UNCONF
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92794
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92791
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92795
Bug ID: 92795
Summary: Another slowness issue in the demangler (on trunk)
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92743
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92796
Bug ID: 92796
Summary: [10 Regression] ICE in lra_assign, at
lra-assigns.c:1646 on powerpc64le-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92797
Bug ID: 92797
Summary: cplus_demangle() produces huge amount of output (on
trunk)
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92773
Charles-Antoine Couret changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #47408|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92797
--- Comment #1 from Tim Ruehsen ---
BTW, llvm-cxxfilt does not show this behavior.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92773
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Hmm, compilation finishes instantly for me. I tried, -O2, -Os and -O3.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92775
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Burgess ---
I ran a bisect and this is the commit where GCC stops producing the DWARF I
would expect to see:
In GIT:
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=47e6a59aedf4b114c2b4865c97a91a7b700cd991
In SVN:
h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92775
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
That means the get_array_descr_info langhook wasn't updated I guess.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92775
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||7.5.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92798
Bug ID: 92798
Summary: -fshort-enums can break iterators of std::map
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: lib
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92591
--- Comment #6 from Roman Zhuykov ---
Patches are still testing. Arm (both 32 and 64 bit) cross compilers are OK,
and I want to test some additional scenarios for powerpc. Probably I'll post
patches next week.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92799
Bug ID: 92799
Summary: ICE: in get, at cgraph.h:1339
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92791
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
So:
struct S { S (void *a, bool b) : x (a), y (b) {} void *x; bool y; };
void bar (S);
void
foo (void *x)
{
S sbuf_it (x, x == nullptr);
bar (sbuf_it);
}
with -O2 -m32 -march=i686 -mtune=i586
gives the s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92800
Bug ID: 92800
Summary: IPA escape analysis for structs
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ipa
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92801
Bug ID: 92801
Summary: Drop unused struct fields
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ipa
Assignee:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92538
--- Comment #4 from Christoph Müllner
---
Early tests with this pass showed that a bunch of SPEC CPU2017 benchmarks
benefit from this. For example, the written-once global variable TTSize of
sjeng
is eliminated by this pass.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92802
Bug ID: 92802
Summary: Struct field reordering
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ipa
Assignee: un
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92803
Bug ID: 92803
Summary: [10 Regression] error: type mismatch in
'vec_perm_expr' since r278764
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-val
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92803
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 47421
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47421&action=edit
test-case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92803
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 47420
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47420&action=edit
test-case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92803
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85463
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92773
--- Comment #6 from Charles-Antoine Couret
---
Ok with a friend we identified a bit more what is the issue.
So in fact I built (manually):
$ gcc -Wall sound/soc/codecs/tas5756m.i -o sound/soc/codecs/tas5756m.o
In that case, no output and it d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92798
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
-fshort-enums is an ABI-changing option, which means you should recompile the
entire toolchain including the standard libraries.
Why are you using it anyway? In C++ you can specify a fixed underlying type,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92791
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
We have in the documentation:
For a named pattern, the condition may not depend on the data in
the insn being matched, but only the target-machine-type flags.
The compiler needs to test these c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92804
Bug ID: 92804
Summary: [10 Regression] ICE trying to use concept as a
nested-name-specifier
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-inva
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92804
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||9.2.1
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92738
--- Comment #12 from Thomas Koenig ---
(In reply to Wilco from comment #11)
> Would using -frepack-arrays solve this issue? I proposed making that the
> default a while back. It would do any repacking that is necessary at call
> sites rather tha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92805
Bug ID: 92805
Summary: gfortran: blanks within literal constants should not
be allowed
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92803
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Reduced testcase with -O2 -mavx:
typedef double v4df __attribute__((vector_size (32)));
typedef double v2df __attribute__((vector_size (16)));
v2df
foo (v4df x, double *p, v2df y)
{
return (v2df) { x[3], *
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92738
--- Comment #13 from Thomas Koenig ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #12)
> People who have problems can then enable
I meant disable, of course.
> that option for
> the specific files they have the problems with.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81178
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Huh, trunk now accepts the program.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92806
Bug ID: 92806
Summary: Suboptimal diagnostic for concept that depends on
non-bool value
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92007
--- Comment #19 from Arseny Solokha ---
I believe this is fixed on both affected branches for over a month, thus the PR
can be closed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92805
ripero84 at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ripero84 at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92176
--- Comment #6 from Vladimir Makarov ---
(In reply to Vladimir Makarov from comment #5)
>
> I'll investigate this problem more.
Hi, Andreas. The rtlanal code (!lra_in_progress) was added to GCC since the
first patch introducing LRA. As I wrot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92007
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92807
Bug ID: 92807
Summary: gcc generate extra move for the snippet code
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: targe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92798
--- Comment #2 from Christian N ---
To be honest, I'm not sure when and why it came to be. The build instructions
are partially from an old project and weren't cleaned properly. The immediate
code base actually only uses scoped enums. The problem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92803
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Untested fix:
--- gcc/tree-ssa-forwprop.c.jj 2019-12-03 20:21:30.554464396 +0100
+++ gcc/tree-ssa-forwprop.c 2019-12-04 17:48:36.351450274 +0100
@@ -2283,11 +2283,11 @@ simplify_vector_constructor (gimpl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92807
Sunil Pandey changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92807
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92803
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92767
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpelinux at gmail dot com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92798
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92808
Bug ID: 92808
Summary: GCC sets BTI flag in .note.gnu.property section even
though not all functions are compiled with BTI
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92807
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92801
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92807
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 47424
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47424&action=edit
A patch
nable-plugin --enable-initfini-array --with-isl
--enable-offload-targets=nvptx-none --without-cuda-driver
--enable-gnu-indirect-function --enable-cet --with-tune=native
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 10.0.0 20191204 (experimental) [trunk revision 278958] (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92775
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92775
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92801
--- Comment #2 from Christoph Müllner
---
Yes, our current approach is all or nothing (i.e. all uses of a struct are
changed or none).
Optimizing individual uses of a type would allow a more tailored optimization.
We decided to defer such an ap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92661
--- Comment #12 from Peter Bergner ---
Author: bergner
Date: Wed Dec 4 19:53:26 2019
New Revision: 278973
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278973&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Do not define builtins that overload disabled builtins.
PR boo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92661
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92810
Bug ID: 92810
Summary: Compiling GCC go for aarch64_be-marvell-linux-gnu
fails
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: build
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92797
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Tim Ruehsen from comment #1)
> BTW, llvm-cxxfilt does not show this behavior.
Could it because it does not implement the D demangler?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92811
Bug ID: 92811
Summary: Odd optimisation differences with lambdas
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84919
--- Comment #17 from Martin Sebor ---
The patch below avoids the warning. Unfortunately, as a result of bug 92666,
it triggers another bogus warning during bootstrap.
Index: gcc/c-family/c-common.c
==
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91661
--- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The following variant of the patch in comment#3 regtests cleanly and handles
more complex cases, like
integer, parameter :: b(a(1)+a(2)) = 3
Index: gcc/fortran/decl.c
==
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70517
Christian Biesinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cbiesinger at google dot com
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81682
Christian Biesinger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cbiesinger at google dot com
--- C
1 - 100 of 132 matches
Mail list logo
