https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109317
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization, ra
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109319
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-checking
--- Comment #2 from Richa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109327
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |13.0
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109283
Steven Sun changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||StevenSun2021 at hotmail dot
com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109329
Bug ID: 109329
Summary: rs6000: New testcases {mul,div}ic3* should run on
systems without QP
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109329
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108357
--- Comment #7 from Xi Ruoyao ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
> (In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #5)
> > The test fails on loongarch64-linux-gnu. foo is kept in 114t.threadfull1,
> > but removed in 135t.forwprop3.
> >
> > D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108357
--- Comment #8 from Xi Ruoyao ---
Created attachment 54783
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54783&action=edit
threadfull1 dump on LoongArch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109318
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|csmith: -fipa-cp seems to |csmith: -fipa-cp seems to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109327
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
It's really an old issue I think. We record a lattice in forwprop, marking
stmts to be removed. But the early forwprop phase runs on the IL with
the stmt operands not substituted, instead relying on old g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109318
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109318
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P2
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109330
Bug ID: 109330
Summary: ASAN since GCC-9 missed a stack-use-after-scope at -O3
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109318
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
With -O2 -fno-early-inlining it can be simplified:
#pragma pack(1)
struct S {
signed : 31;
unsigned f4 : 20;
};
static struct S global;
static struct S func_16(struct S *ptr) { return *ptr; }
int
ma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106608
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Egor Pugin from comment #1)
> All major compilers (MSVC, GCC, Clang) of all (tried) modern versions (in
> case of GCC — before 12) build this code without problems. Is this a GCC
> regression?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109327
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7fd1d28d2436065da7fc0fe01d787fcdf3c14b83
commit r13-6926-g7fd1d28d2436065da7fc0fe01d787fcdf3c14b83
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109318
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jamborm at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109327
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106608
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12/13 Regression] |std::optional requires
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92960
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87477
Bug 87477 depends on bug 92960, which changed state.
Bug 92960 Summary: ICE tree check: expected tree that contains 'decl minimal'
structure, have 'component_ref' in add_decl_as_local, at
fortran/trans-decl.c:261
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sho
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109231
--- Comment #22 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #21 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
>> --- Comment #20 from Jakub Jelinek ---
>> Tried valgrind on the cross d21 on x86_64 and didn't see a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109331
Bug ID: 109331
Summary: ice: definition in block 7 does not dominate use in
block 8
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108357
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #7)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
> > (In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #5)
> > > The test fails on loongarch64-linux-gnu. foo is kept in 114t.threadf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109332
Bug ID: 109332
Summary: Bug in gcc (13.0.1) support for ARM SVE, which
randomly ignore the predict register
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Seve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109333
Bug ID: 109333
Summary: Use std::move in std::accumulate etc. for std::string
for C++11/14/17
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109331
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |tree-optimization
Assignee|u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109332
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109231
--- Comment #23 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Ugh, that sounds like an uninitialized use of something somewhere,
unfortunately if it is really my commit, I don't understand how it could cause
it.
All it changes is that when tree_versioning is called, t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109334
Bug ID: 109334
Summary: tree-object-size: Improve size computation in
arguments
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104970
--- Comment #14 from Siddhesh Poyarekar ---
(In reply to Martin Uecker from comment #13)
> This fix seem too radical. It now prevents this from working even when there
> is an explicit attribute but there is also a VLA bound. Also I think it
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107561
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107561
--- Comment #24 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 54784
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54784&action=edit
another hack
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109319
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Summary|[13 Regression] I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109331
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:86efc490ab86bfa00720479b4714da23cd7df797
commit r13-6928-g86efc490ab86bfa00720479b4714da23cd7df797
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109331
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108865
--- Comment #31 from Costas Argyris ---
This was initially done only for the 64-bit mingw Windows host
(x86_64-*-mingw*).
This is the patch that extended it to the 32-bit version as well
(i[34567]86-*-mingw32*):
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108865
--- Comment #32 from Costas Argyris ---
Followed by:
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commitdiff;h=e70e36cbef4f01e7d32bafe17698c3bf3e4624b8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108865
--- Comment #33 from Costas Argyris ---
It should be noted that with the current implementation, windres (part of
binutils) is mandatory when building for the mingw (Windows) hosts, both 32 and
64-bit versions.
That is, a build failure will occ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109330
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109310
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109310
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8b2766e87dbf0d20808bc92d8e6ee7f876d19ab2
commit r13-6929-g8b2766e87dbf0d20808bc92d8e6ee7f876d19ab2
Author: Martin Liska
Date: Wed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106511
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||12.2.0
--- Comment #4 from Richard Bie
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106008
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Keywords|missed-optimizat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109319
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109324
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109335
Bug ID: 109335
Summary: -Wanalyzer-malloc-leak false positives and false
negatives
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109336
Bug ID: 109336
Summary: The -fmod= and -fdef= options do not work.
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: modul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109336
Gaius Mulley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109231
--- Comment #24 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #23 from Jakub Jelinek ---
[...]
> Perhaps try to undo my patch in a different way, like
> --- gcc/tree-inline.cc 2023-03-17 18:59:50.226199917 +0100
> +++ gcc/tree-inli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109213
--- Comment #8 from Jan Hubicka ---
We have large-stack-frame-growth that is relative, so yes, increasing stack
size of caller makes gcc to think that it is heavy and making it event heavier
will not hurt that much.
We originally ran into stack
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109231
--- Comment #25 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #24)
> > --- Comment #23 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> [...]
> > Perhaps try to undo my patch in a different way, like
> > --- gcc/tree-inline.cc 2023-03
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109231
--- Comment #26 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #25 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> (In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #24)
>> > --- Comment #23 from Jakub Jelinek ---
>> [...]
>> So far, I've tried both
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109231
--- Comment #27 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Thanks. It is a mystery so far :(.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109303
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109283
--- Comment #2 from ncm at cantrip dot org ---
Betting this one is fixed by deleting code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109331
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target Milestone|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108896
--- Comment #34 from Martin Uecker ---
Created attachment 54787
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54787&action=edit
patch for C FE to add size expressions to VM types in structs
Here is a preliminary patch for C FE just to s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109303
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
And the problem is similar to PR108605, most of IPA uses unsigned int as type
for byte offsets and while some spots check for offsets while bit offsets are
typically using HOST_WIDE_INT. So, some larger bit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109336
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Gaius Mulley :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3be4e43a6a0f429648ea188c8e110b74268fed27
commit r13-6931-g3be4e43a6a0f429648ea188c8e110b74268fed27
Author: Gaius Mulley
Date: Wed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109315
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Gaius Mulley :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3be4e43a6a0f429648ea188c8e110b74268fed27
commit r13-6931-g3be4e43a6a0f429648ea188c8e110b74268fed27
Author: Gaius Mulley
Date: Wed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109315
Gaius Mulley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109303
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
--- gcc/ipa-cp.cc.jj2023-03-14 19:12:19.949553036 +0100
+++ gcc/ipa-cp.cc 2023-03-29 18:32:34.14423 +0200
@@ -3117,7 +3117,9 @@ propagate_aggs_across_jump_function (str
{
HOST
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109336
Gaius Mulley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59498
--- Comment #22 from ncm at cantrip dot org ---
CWG 1430 seems to be about disallowing a construct that requires capturing an
alias declaration into a name mangling. This bug and at least some of those
referred to it do not ask for any such action
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109322
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Priorit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107396
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91645
--- Comment #9 from Aldy Hernandez ---
It looks like what we want for this test is actually !isgreaterequal() not
isless(), since we want to exclude the possibility of a NAN. Like this:
float test (float x)
{
if (!__builtin_isgreaterequal (x,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103559
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91645
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||llvm at rifkin dot dev
--- Comment #10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109322
--- Comment #2 from Eric Reischer ---
I can't point to a specific standard that says, "thou shalt generate output
with these types..."; it's more of a "we probably should be doing this"-type
thing. If you are compiling Fortran and C on the same
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106573
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by David Malcolm
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:62a565e56763c65ec9e134735aa780cf2b1c3cfa
commit r12-9354-g62a565e56763c65ec9e134735aa780cf2b1c3cfa
Author: David Malcolm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106573
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by David Malcolm
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c63e5a234d0193e1f41024cf0eee840998e04c7f
commit r12-9355-gc63e5a234d0193e1f41024cf0eee840998e04c7f
Author: David Malcolm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107345
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by David Malcolm
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:111fb5d3cafd0f7f2a0d01aa9e1213013fa0cc83
commit r12-9357-g111fb5d3cafd0f7f2a0d01aa9e1213013fa0cc83
Author: David Malcolm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107582
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by David Malcolm
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e7f7483d50069fede8450091449714d122c58fca
commit r12-9358-ge7f7483d50069fede8450091449714d122c58fca
Author: David Malcolm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105784
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by David Malcolm
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1c66f1c6d69dbe0a855f7adb61df8d92ca523899
commit r12-9359-g1c66f1c6d69dbe0a855f7adb61df8d92ca523899
Author: David Malcolm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108704
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by David Malcolm
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5da2126c4df8d83c2b2f9de7bb393ab4f5832840
commit r12-9364-g5da2126c4df8d83c2b2f9de7bb393ab4f5832840
Author: David Malcolm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107948
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by David Malcolm
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a7cc8ecefb72f06368b055fa60f5a2ff2eb6dfdb
commit r12-9360-ga7cc8ecefb72f06368b055fa60f5a2ff2eb6dfdb
Author: David Malcolm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108968
--- Comment #19 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by David Malcolm
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:833d822ff0e83478a4fe536d55dfb22cde8ddc40
commit r12-9366-g833d822ff0e83478a4fe536d55dfb22cde8ddc40
Author: David Malcolm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106325
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by David Malcolm
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:02fbda165b74179469d9eae436fed613aa6a6ebb
commit r12-9362-g02fbda165b74179469d9eae436fed613aa6a6ebb
Author: David Malcolm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108733
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by David Malcolm
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:98558117ba870d47398927f2066e469e47f39c16
commit r12-9365-g98558117ba870d47398927f2066e469e47f39c16
Author: David Malcolm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109328
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 54788
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54788&action=edit
Patch which improves the depedencies
Note I am not 100% sure this is all the way. But you should get the idea
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109094
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by David Malcolm
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7903e0bca003840751c109cfa41e5a1528ece12a
commit r12-9367-g7903e0bca003840751c109cfa41e5a1528ece12a
Author: David Malcolm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109328
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
Summary|Build fail in R
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103559
--- Comment #6 from Jeremy R. ---
Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103559
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109337
Bug ID: 109337
Summary: c++2a test concepts4.C passes when it should fail
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109337
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109338
Bug ID: 109338
Summary: `S auto>` isn't valid C++20
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Ass
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109337
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Reduced testcase:
```
template concept A42b = true;
template concept R42c = A42b;
static_assert (R42c);
```
GCC does the right thing for too:
```
template bool A42b = true;
template concept R42c = A42
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100248
Arthur O'Dwyer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arthur.j.odwyer at gmail dot
com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109338
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Testcase:
```
template
concept C = true;
template
struct A {};
void f(A auto >) {}
```
Please place the testcase in the comment or attach it; don't just link to
godbolt.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109337
--- Comment #3 from Christopher Di Bella ---
This is apparently a Clang bug: the RHS of `R42c` isn't evaluated because of
short-circuiting. Apologies for the noise and thanks for helping me work
through it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109337
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109337
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|NEW
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109094
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105784
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107345
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108562
Bug 108562 depends on bug 107345, which changed state.
Bug 107345 Summary: -Wanalyzer-null-dereference false positive with giving
weird path infomation
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107345
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107582
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
1 - 100 of 132 matches
Mail list logo
