[Bug testsuite/95706] New test case gfortran.dg/pr95690.f90 fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95706 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug target/96026] New: overlap register bewteen DEST and SOURCE in different machine mode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96026 Bug ID: 96026 Summary: overlap register bewteen DEST and SOURCE in different machine mode Product: gcc Version: 9.3.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/95446] False positive for optional arguments of elemental procedure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95446 markeggleston at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||markeggleston at gcc do

[Bug fortran/95584] ICE in generic_correspondence, at fortran/interface.c:1260

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95584 markeggleston at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||markeggleston at gcc do

[Bug target/96015] [10/11 Regression] gcc-10.1.0 miscompiles Python on hppa

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96015 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Ever confirmed|0

[Bug gcov-profile/95348] GCC records zero functions and modules in the profiling data file, ICC does NOT

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95348 --- Comment #42 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ece21ff6ea9d969d3b6aae82136622a7126eefc1 commit r11-1778-gece21ff6ea9d969d3b6aae82136622a7126eefc1 Author: Martin Liska Date: Tue

[Bug gcov-profile/95348] GCC records zero functions and modules in the profiling data file, ICC does NOT

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95348 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|marxin at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug gcov-profile/95348] GCC records zero functions and modules in the profiling data file, ICC does NOT

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95348 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW

[Bug tree-optimization/96022] ICE during GIMPLE pass: slp in operator[], at vec.h:867

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96022 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2

[Bug c++/94594] struct containing an aligned obj with stronger alignment, change the alignment accordingly instead of throwing an error, inconsistent with the C++ standard

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94594 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Keywords|

[Bug c++/65685] Reducing alignment with alignas should be rejected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65685 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sinbal2l at gmail dot com --- Comment

[Bug c++/94569] alignas(object) with a weaker (smaller) alignment than the alignas(type) of it's type compiles, inconsistent with the C++ standard

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94569 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|NEW

[Bug c++/65685] Reducing alignment with alignas should be rejected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65685 --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely --- *** Bug 94569 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Re: How GCC treats ice-on-invalid-code?

> You mean, an ICE is perfectly valid as the first (and obviously then > only) error diagnostic the compiler prints for “garbage input”? > If so, I don't think that's true. What counts as “garbage” seems > a bit too subjective for that anyway. When the input is totally nonsensical, e.g. generated

[Bug preprocessor/96027] New: Windows: gcc does not resolve long relative header paths correctly

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96027 Bug ID: 96027 Summary: Windows: gcc does not resolve long relative header paths correctly Product: gcc Version: 8.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/95961] ICE: in exact_div, at poly-int.h:2182

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95961 --- Comment #1 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5c9669a0e6cbf477a03024522943197bdb2682d4 commit r11-1781-g5c9669a0e6cbf477a03024522943197bdb2682d4 Author: Fei Yang Date: Thu

[Bug tree-optimization/96028] New: SEGV in vect_create_constant_vectors

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96028 Bug ID: 96028 Summary: SEGV in vect_create_constant_vectors Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-optimiza

[Bug tree-optimization/96022] ICE during GIMPLE pass: slp in operator[], at vec.h:867

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96022 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d5d9f7834ab809841c4ccc90bca74808b4bcaf8d commit r11-1782-gd5d9f7834ab809841c4ccc90bca74808b4bcaf8d Author: Richard Biener Date:

[Bug tree-optimization/96022] ICE during GIMPLE pass: slp in operator[], at vec.h:867

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96022 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug tree-optimization/96028] SEGV in vect_create_constant_vectors

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96028 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.0

[Bug testsuite/95706] New test case gfortran.dg/pr95690.f90 fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95706 --- Comment #9 from Richard Biener --- David "fixed" this on trunk with the following, the testcase still fails on the branch and of course we don't know why it exhibits this particular behavior. commit b260e9123e3c80e0f4e18e6a6ac988d63042e741 A

[Bug tree-optimization/96028] SEGV in vect_create_constant_vectors

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96028 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/96028] SEGV in vect_create_constant_vectors

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96028 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- Do I need some special flags? > /tmp/obj/gcc/xgcc -B/tmp/obj/gcc/ > /home/rguenther/src/gcc3/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr95761.c > -fno-diagnostics-show-caret -fno-diagnostics-show-line-numbers > -

[Bug tree-optimization/96028] SEGV in vect_create_constant_vectors

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96028 --- Comment #3 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- > --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- > Do I need some special flags? The -m64 is crucial: the test PASSes for me for the default -m32.

[Bug tree-optimization/96028] SEGV in vect_create_constant_vectors

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96028 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #3) > > --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- > > Do I need some special flags? > > The -m64 is crucial: the test PASSes for me for the default -m32

[Bug target/96015] [10/11 Regression] gcc-10.1.0 miscompiles Python on hppa

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96015 Eric Botcazou changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c/95857] [8/9/10/11 Regression] Silencing an unused label warning with (void)&&label; can make gcc segfault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95857 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c/95857] [8/9/10 Regression] Silencing an unused label warning with (void)&&label; can make gcc segfault

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95857 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[8/9/10/11 Regression] |[8/9/10 Regression] |S

[Bug preprocessor/96027] Windows: gcc does not resolve long relative header paths correctly

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96027 --- Comment #1 from Kai Köhne --- This was the result of a bug report for Qt : https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-85157

[Bug tree-optimization/96028] [11 Regression] SEGV in vect_create_constant_vectors

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96028 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|SEGV in |[11 Regression] SEGV in

[Bug fortran/52279] Fortran translation issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52279 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Mark Eggleston : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d0e7c73c515c305863620a821ee85bc557bfbef5 commit r11-1784-gd0e7c73c515c305863620a821ee85bc557bfbef5 Author: Mark Eggleston Date:

[Bug tree-optimization/95961] ICE: in exact_div, at poly-int.h:2182

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95961 rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolutio

[Bug fortran/52279] Fortran translation issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52279 markeggleston at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||markeggleston at gcc do

[Bug c++/94569] alignas(object) with a weaker (smaller) alignment than the alignas(type) of it's type compiles, inconsistent with the C++ standard

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94569 --- Comment #7 from Inbal Levi --- Not exactly. 94594 is talking about object's members impose their alignment on the object's type, whether this bug is talking about object type imposes its alignment on every object of that type (notice that in

[Bug c++/94569] alignas(object) with a weaker (smaller) alignment than the alignas(type) of it's type compiles, inconsistent with the C++ standard

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94569 --- Comment #8 from Inbal Levi --- See here: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45890

[Bug fortran/52279] Fortran translation issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52279 --- Comment #5 from markeggleston at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to markeggleston from comment #4) > Regarding comment 2. > > Using -fallow-invalid-boz results in an ICE. I'll create a new PR. Not true, tried it on the wrong file and jumped to

[Bug c++/95700] read-md.c: "missing sentinel in function call" when building gcc with musl

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95700 --- Comment #9 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Ilya Leoshkevich : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d59a576b8b5e12c3a56f0262912090e2921f5daa commit r11-1785-gd59a576b8b5e12c3a56f0262912090e2921f5daa Author: Ilya Leoshkevich Date

[Bug middle-end/95830] [11 regression][MIPS/MSA] internal compiler error: in do_store_flag, at expr.c:12247 start with gcc-11-1445-g502d63b6d61

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95830 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma

[Bug middle-end/95830] [11 regression][MIPS/MSA] internal compiler error: in do_store_flag, at expr.c:12247 start with gcc-11-1445-g502d63b6d61

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95830 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|REOPENED

[Bug c++/95910] transform view in combination with single view calls const qualified begin even if it is not const

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95910 --- Comment #2 from Rene Rahn --- Ok, thanks for the explanation. I do understand the issue now and why it causes the hard error and not an substitution failure. But honestly, given that it works for container because they are wrapped in a ref_v

[Bug libstdc++/96029] New: Inconsistencies with associative/unordered containers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96029 Bug ID: 96029 Summary: Inconsistencies with associative/unordered containers Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Comp

[Bug fortran/96030] New: AArch64: Add an option to control 64bits simdclone of math functions for fortran

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96030 Bug ID: 96030 Summary: AArch64: Add an option to control 64bits simdclone of math functions for fortran Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity:

[Bug target/90932] [nvptx] internal compiler error: in tree_to_shwi, at tree.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90932 Tom de Vries changed: What|Removed |Added CC||roger at nextmovesoftware dot com --- Co

[Bug debug/95343] IPA-SRA can result in wrong debug info about removed function arguments

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95343 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Martin Jambor : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:053c88093a45f175f446eda009f3312e4e508514 commit r11-1787-g053c88093a45f175f446eda009f3312e4e508514 Author: Martin Jambor Date: Th

[Bug tree-optimization/96028] [11 Regression] SEGV in vect_create_constant_vectors

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96028 --- Comment #6 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:105ecbea5f402713130fef4d41bb000e2d23493b commit r11-1788-g105ecbea5f402713130fef4d41bb000e2d23493b Author: Richard Biener Date:

[Bug tree-optimization/96028] [11 Regression] SEGV in vect_create_constant_vectors

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96028 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug libstdc++/96029] [8/9/10/11 Regression] Inconsistencies with associative/unordered containers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96029 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||6.5.0 Version|unknown

[Bug rtl-optimization/96031] New: suboptimal codegen for store low 16-bits value

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96031 Bug ID: 96031 Summary: suboptimal codegen for store low 16-bits value Product: gcc Version: 8.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: rt

[Bug other/96032] New: Feature request: Add a way to format output from --fdiagnostics-format=json

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96032 Bug ID: 96032 Summary: Feature request: Add a way to format output from --fdiagnostics-format=json Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: n

[Bug other/96032] Feature request: Add a way to format output from --fdiagnostics-format=json

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96032 --- Comment #1 from Christian Friedl --- Disclaimer: I posted a request for help regarding this exact feature on the gcc-help list. (https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-help/2020-July/139110.html) After reading through the list I came to the concl

[Bug c++/65685] Reducing alignment with alignas should be rejected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65685 --- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely --- There are two facets to this. GCC allows alignas with a weaker alignment on a type, and ignores it. GCC also allows alignas with a weaker alignment on an object declaration, and reduces the alignment. In bo

[Bug c++/94569] alignas(object) with a weaker (smaller) alignment than the alignas(type) of it's type compiles, inconsistent with the C++ standard

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94569 --- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely --- Both bugs are violations of [dcl.align] p5 though. The bug is not that GCC doesn't follow [basic.align] p1 (it does) but that it allows alignas to weaken the alignment later. GCC should not allow alignas to

[Bug libstdc++/96029] [8/9/10/11 Regression] Inconsistencies with associative/unordered containers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96029 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |8.5

[Bug fortran/96030] AArch64: Add an option to control 64bits simdclone of math functions for fortran

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96030 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug fortran/96033] New: error: The Fortran compiler gfortran will not compile files that call the same routine with arguments of different types.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96033 Bug ID: 96033 Summary: error: The Fortran compiler gfortran will not compile files that call the same routine with arguments of different types. Product: gcc Vers

[Bug fortran/96033] error: The Fortran compiler gfortran will not compile files that call the same routine with arguments of different types.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96033 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |INVALID Status|UNCONF

[Bug fortran/96033] error: The Fortran compiler gfortran will not compile files that call the same routine with arguments of different types.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96033 --- Comment #2 from Sylvain Korzennik --- Merci Dominique. Will transmit info to MVAPICH2 ppl. The configuration script needs to be changed, this is not "faulty code", it is a test code part of the package configuration specifically to test i

[Bug c++/94569] alignas(object) with a weaker (smaller) alignment than the alignas(type) of it's type compiles, inconsistent with the C++ standard

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94569 --- Comment #10 from Inbal Levi --- Actually, you're right about the origin being [dcl.align]p5 here too, though the test cases are different. Thanks.

[Bug fortran/96033] error: The Fortran compiler gfortran will not compile files that call the same routine with arguments of different types.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96033 --- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres --- You can find a quite long discussion about legacy at https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.fortran/Ed8Mccy9zo8

[Bug target/95952] [8 Regression] gcc-8 bootstrap failure on powerpc64-linux

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95952 --- Comment #10 from Will Schmidt --- (In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #8) > So what is the instruction / builtin / anything where it fails? I've managed to recreate the altivec_init_builtins ICE issue on a yellowdog box. (4-core 97

[Bug fortran/96033] error: The Fortran compiler gfortran will not compile files that call the same routine with arguments of different types.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96033 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug target/95952] [8 Regression] gcc-8 bootstrap failure on powerpc64-linux

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95952 --- Comment #11 from Peter Bergner --- (In reply to Mikael Pettersson from comment #9) > binutils-2.23.88.0.1-13.fc20.ppc64 > > I can build a recent binutils release and retry the gcc-8 bootstrap with > that tomorrow. But since gcc-9/10/11 all

[Bug fortran/52279] Fortran translation issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52279 --- Comment #6 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to markeggleston from comment #5) > (In reply to markeggleston from comment #4) > > Regarding comment 2. > > > > Using -fallow-invalid-boz results in an ICE. I'll create a new PR. > > No

[Bug tree-optimization/96034] New: missed optimization with extended registers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96034 Bug ID: 96034 Summary: missed optimization with extended registers Product: gcc Version: 9.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-

[Bug c++/94905] Bogus warning -Werror=maybe-uninitialized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94905 Chris Moller changed: What|Removed |Added CC||moller at mollerware dot com --- Comment

[Bug c++/94905] Bogus warning -Werror=maybe-uninitialized

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94905 --- Comment #8 from Chris Moller --- Created attachment 48825 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48825&action=edit Preprocessed testcase gunzip then compile with g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I..-Wall -I sql -Werror -rdyn

[Bug fortran/52279] Fortran translation issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52279 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #7

[Bug target/95952] [8 Regression] gcc-8 bootstrap failure on powerpc64-linux

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95952 --- Comment #12 from Mikael Pettersson --- (In reply to Peter Bergner from comment #11) > At some point in the past, GCC used to disable some instruction patterns > depending on whether the binutils you're building against supports those > instru

[Bug fortran/96033] error: The Fortran compiler gfortran will not compile files that call the same routine with arguments of different types.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96033 --- Comment #5 from Sylvain Korzennik --- Hi Kargl, I am not interested in a protracted religious discussion, I simply do not use gfortran for my work (research), but need to provides it form my users (Smithsonian HPC cluster) as part of my du

[Bug libgcc/96035] New: directories created when writing gcov data have limited rights compared to umask

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96035 Bug ID: 96035 Summary: directories created when writing gcov data have limited rights compared to umask Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severi

[Bug libgcc/96035] directories created when writing gcov data have limited rights compared to umask

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96035 --- Comment #1 from Michel Palleau --- Created attachment 48826 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48826&action=edit Proposal to create directories with process umask

[Bug fortran/52279] Fortran translation issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52279 --- Comment #8 from Steve Kargl --- On Thu, Jul 02, 2020 at 03:53:22PM +, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > > --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- > (In reply to kargl from comment #6) > > There is no -fno-allow-invalid-boz option. The op

[Bug tree-optimization/96034] missed optimization with extended registers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96034 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug fortran/96033] error: The Fortran compiler gfortran will not compile files that call the same routine with arguments of different types.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96033 --- Comment #6 from Steve Kargl --- On Thu, Jul 02, 2020 at 04:10:38PM +, skorzennik at cfa dot harvard.edu wrote: > > GCC is the single one that decides that old code is trash and needs to be > rewritten. When 64b was introduced, gfortran

[Bug fortran/52279] Fortran translation issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52279 --- Comment #9 from Andreas Schwab --- That means you cannot override a default.

[Bug target/96015] [10/11 Regression] gcc-10.1.0 miscompiles Python on hppa

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96015 --- Comment #19 from Sergei Trofimovich --- Created attachment 48827 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48827&action=edit bad.S

[Bug fortran/52279] Fortran translation issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52279 --- Comment #10 from Steve Kargl --- On Thu, Jul 02, 2020 at 05:10:51PM +, sch...@linux-m68k.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52279 > > --- Comment #9 from Andreas Schwab --- > That means you cannot override a defau

[Bug target/96015] [10/11 Regression] gcc-10.1.0 miscompiles Python on hppa

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96015 --- Comment #20 from Sergei Trofimovich --- Created attachment 48828 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48828&action=edit good.S

[Bug target/96015] [10/11 Regression] gcc-10.1.0 miscompiles Python on hppa

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96015 --- Comment #21 from Sergei Trofimovich --- (In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #18) > If the control flow goes through .L12: > > .L12: > b .L3; return 0; (not interesting, fall through) > ldi 1,%r28 > > the return value w

[Bug fortran/52279] Fortran translation issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52279 --- Comment #11 from Andreas Schwab --- If it was enabled by default, you cannot negate it.

[Bug fortran/96033] error: The Fortran compiler gfortran will not compile files that call the same routine with arguments of different types.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96033 --- Comment #7 from Sylvain Korzennik --- Thanks for following up, Steve. I gave up on gfortran when the 64b record marker made it unusable for me. I'm not surprised it was fixed, but this pointed to poor decision making and ignoring the need to

[Bug target/93224] 29_atomics/atomic_ref/float.cc fails with a tweaked IPA inliner

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93224 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c6f431bba531bac3212b66069cf0f9718edf0132 commit r11-1790-gc6f431bba531bac3212b66069cf0f9718edf0132 Author: Jonathan Wakely Date:

[Bug libstdc++/91153] New test case 29_atomics/atomic_float/1.cc execution test fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91153 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c6f431bba531bac3212b66069cf0f9718edf0132 commit r11-1790-gc6f431bba531bac3212b66069cf0f9718edf0132 Author: Jonathan Wakely Date:

[Bug tree-optimization/96034] missed optimization with extended registers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96034 sshannin at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |INVALID Status|UN

[Bug fortran/71706] [8/9 Regression] [Coarray] ICE on using sync images with integer(kind<>4), with -fcoarray=lib -fcheck=bounds

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71706 --- Comment #18 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-8 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:10b028c2813f683a8ebab7d36c9d0d05b49a710b commit r8-10340-g10b028c2813f683a8ebab7d36c9d0d05b49a710b Author: Harald Anlauf D

[Bug fortran/96033] error: The Fortran compiler gfortran will not compile files that call the same routine with arguments of different types.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96033 --- Comment #8 from Steve Kargl --- On Thu, Jul 02, 2020 at 05:31:21PM +, skorzennik at cfa dot harvard.edu wrote: > > I gave up on gfortran when the 64b record marker made it unusable for me. I'm > not surprised it was fixed, but this point

[Bug fortran/71706] [8/9 Regression] [Coarray] ICE on using sync images with integer(kind<>4), with -fcoarray=lib -fcheck=bounds

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71706 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSI

[Bug fortran/27766] [meta-bug] -fbounds-check related bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27766 Bug 27766 depends on bug 71706, which changed state. Bug 71706 Summary: [8/9 Regression] [Coarray] ICE on using sync images with integer(kind<>4), with -fcoarray=lib -fcheck=bounds https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71706 Wh

[Bug fortran/83700] [Meta-bug] Fortran Coarray issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83700 Bug 83700 depends on bug 71706, which changed state. Bug 71706 Summary: [8/9 Regression] [Coarray] ICE on using sync images with integer(kind<>4), with -fcoarray=lib -fcheck=bounds https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71706 Wh

[Bug fortran/52279] Fortran translation issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52279 --- Comment #12 from Steve Kargl --- On Thu, Jul 02, 2020 at 05:24:36PM +, sch...@linux-m68k.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52279 > > --- Comment #11 from Andreas Schwab --- > If it was enabled by default, you can

[Bug fortran/93337] [9/10/11 Regression] ICE in gfc_dt_upper_string, at fortran/module.c:441

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93337 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d9fb6f2b4f1321b059807ff6073156f07d9d376b commit r11-1791-gd9fb6f2b4f1321b059807ff6073156f07d9d376b Author: Harald Anlauf Date: Th

[Bug fortran/93423] [8/9/10/11 Regression] ICE on invalid with argument list for module procedure

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93423 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b88744905a46be44ffa3c57d46080f601ae832b8 commit r11-1792-gb88744905a46be44ffa3c57d46080f601ae832b8 Author: Harald Anlauf Date: Th

[Bug libstdc++/91153] New test case 29_atomics/atomic_float/1.cc execution test fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91153 --- Comment #6 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:14d4e7bc303a92f620eddcba9cef88da7e91514c commit r10-8416-g14d4e7bc303a92f620eddcba9cef88da7e91514c Author: Jonathan Wakel

[Bug target/93224] 29_atomics/atomic_ref/float.cc fails with a tweaked IPA inliner

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93224 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:14d4e7bc303a92f620eddcba9cef88da7e91514c commit r10-8416-g14d4e7bc303a92f620eddcba9cef88da7e91514c Author: Jonathan Wakel

[Bug target/93224] 29_atomics/atomic_ref/float.cc fails with a tweaked IPA inliner

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93224 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/91153] New test case 29_atomics/atomic_float/1.cc execution test fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91153 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|---

[Bug libstdc++/96036] New: Please make std::optinal noexcept constructible when possible

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96036 Bug ID: 96036 Summary: Please make std::optinal noexcept constructible when possible Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/88379] [8/9/10/11 Regression] [Coarray] ICE with allocatable coarray, class and associate in resolve_assoc_var, at fortran/resolve.c:8750

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88379 --- Comment #6 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:66640d910595faded4425cfe2729ddf9d16e457b commit r10-8417-g66640d910595faded4425cfe2729ddf9d16e457b Author: Harald Anlauf D

[Bug fortran/88379] [8/9 Regression] [Coarray] ICE with allocatable coarray, class and associate in resolve_assoc_var, at fortran/resolve.c:8750

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88379 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[8/9/10/11 Regression] |[8/9 Regression] [Coarray]

[Bug fortran/96033] error: The Fortran compiler gfortran will not compile files that call the same routine with arguments of different types.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96033 --- Comment #9 from Steve Kargl --- On Thu, Jul 02, 2020 at 06:30:40PM +, sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu wrote: > > It isn't a matter of simply switching rules. It's a matter of bugs > and whether the bug is reported. In the small

  1   2   >