https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117859
Bug ID: 117859
Summary: ICE on valid code at -O{2,3} with "-fno-ssa-phiopt
-fno-expensive-optimization": Segmentation fault
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100501
Joseph S. Myers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||15.0
Summary|[12/13/14/15
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117861
Bug ID: 117861
Summary: pragma Suppress (Overflow_check) is ignored and
overflow fails at compilation rather than throwing an
exception
Product: gcc
Version: 14.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100792
Joseph S. Myers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||15.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100792
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Joseph Myers :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:abea0dbd63ddb7e16d13806df929e1ef3b060091
commit r15-5827-gabea0dbd63ddb7e16d13806df929e1ef3b060091
Author: Joseph Myers
Date: Sat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100501
--- Comment #14 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Joseph Myers :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:abea0dbd63ddb7e16d13806df929e1ef3b060091
commit r15-5827-gabea0dbd63ddb7e16d13806df929e1ef3b060091
Author: Joseph Myers
Date: Sa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117861
--- Comment #1 from Saada Mehdi <00120260a at gmail dot com> ---
On the other hand the following
> pragma suppress (Overflow_Check);
> pragma suppress (Range_Check);
> procedure Increment_integer is
> A: Boolean := Boolean'Last;
> begin
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117859
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-11-30
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117859
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
/* (A CMP B) != 0 is the same as (A CMP B).
(A CMP B) == 0 is just (A CMP B) with the edges swapped. */
if (is_gimple_assign (def_stmt)
&& TREE_CODE_CLASS (gimple_assign_rhs_c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110405
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Another testcase:
```
int g(int);
int f(int a)
{
short t = a;
if (t != 1)
return 0;
// t is known to be 1 so `a&0x == 1` is true
// and `0x1&0x == 0` which is false
return g(a == 0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117834
--- Comment #4 from Gleb Mazovetskiy ---
Created attachment 59750
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59750&action=edit
example patch for tiger
The following patch fixes that particular error (the proper fix should probably
be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117857
Bug ID: 117857
Summary: libgfortran on powerpc-darwin8 doesn't compile:
`-Wint-conversion` in `stream_ttyname`
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117857
--- Comment #1 from Gleb Mazovetskiy ---
On my macOS 10.4 Tiger PowerPC, /usr/include/unistd.h contains the following:
#if __DARWIN_UNIX03
int ttyname_r(int, char *, size_t) __DARWIN_ALIAS(ttyname_r);
#else /* !__DARWIN_UNIX03 */
char*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117088
Andrew Macleod changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amacleod at redhat dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117811
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
--- Comment #10 from Sam Ja
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117858
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Reduced testcase:
```
#include
struct Focus
{
template
constexpr explicit Focus(T newValue, int t = 0) {}
};
std::optional f;
void g()
{
std::optional a;
f = a;
}
```
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117858
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84245
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pault at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117860
Bug ID: 117860
Summary: GCC emits an unnecessary mov for x86
_addcarry/_subborrow intrinsic calls where the second
operand is a constant that is within the range of a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117858
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117858
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
This has been failing sometime before 20240727 (which is right after the
patches I mentioned).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117851
--- Comment #6 from Matthias Klose ---
tested on the trunk, and on the gcc-14 branch with offload compilers
configured. libgomp test failures down from 1000 to 10.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117858
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
Reduced all the way:
```
#include
struct Focus
{
template
Focus(T newValue) { }
};
void g(std::optional f)
{
f = f;
}
```
I could use auto as the type for the Focus's ctor but I wanted it still be
c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105054
--- Comment #10 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-14 branch has been updated by Paul Thomas :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:dd1d74cb548428f5928c10f7d3ba2b3cdd5ddc80
commit r14-11012-gdd1d74cb548428f5928c10f7d3ba2b3cdd5ddc80
Author: Paul Thomas
Da
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117857
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/legacy-ml/fortran/2011-01/msg00256.html
Why is autoconfig's AC_USE_SYSTEM_EXTENSIONS not working for darwin8 here? Or
is darwin8 just that broken. This was 13 years ago even.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117851
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f089ef880e385e2193237b1f53ec81dac4141680
commit r15-5820-gf089ef880e385e2193237b1f53ec81dac4141680
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105054
--- Comment #11 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Paul Thomas :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:351fc7565610574f7677972b0d9c4559eaff32f0
commit r13-9223-g351fc7565610574f7677972b0d9c4559eaff32f0
Author: Paul Thomas
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105054
--- Comment #12 from GCC Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Paul Thomas :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:da848c3b9396456c85d8c8055af8158148cbc1a6
commit r12-10840-gda848c3b9396456c85d8c8055af8158148cbc1a6
Author: Paul Thomas
Da
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105054
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117057
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6bebb3b0f3fa422d248a1c2075da0598a44c7320
commit r15-5821-g6bebb3b0f3fa422d248a1c2075da0598a44c7320
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117849
--- Comment #5 from Matthias Kretz (Vir) ---
Thanks for looking into this issue!
Yes, GCC is currently the compiler that comes closest to implementing P2280 -
Clang fails on so many more examples here. However, WG21 just voted library
wording in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117805
--- Comment #20 from mjr19 at cam dot ac.uk ---
I am not convinced that gfortran's current behaviour is wholly consistent with
what a mathematician would reasonably expect. When I was taught complex
arithmetic, multiplication by one and addition
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117857
--- Comment #6 from Gleb Mazovetskiy ---
> This has been "broken" since r0-106339-g6a0f6e7799c988 (GCC 4.6.0) Over 13
> years ago.
I don't think so. GCC7 has been the version used by macports for a while, and
more recently some reported compil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117857
--- Comment #2 from Gleb Mazovetskiy ---
Created attachment 59751
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59751&action=edit
workaround patch for darwin8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84211
--- Comment #4 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Georg-Johann Lay :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:214985f6b35ea8038c4e96590b435aaef2919769
commit r15-5822-g214985f6b35ea8038c4e96590b435aaef2919769
Author: Georg-Johann Lay
Date
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117057
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114542
Heiko Eißfeldt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||heiko at hexco dot de
--- Comment #1 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114542
--- Comment #2 from Heiko Eißfeldt ---
Filed a GNUmake bug report for that:
https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/index.php?66499
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117850
--- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
> Am 29.11.2024 um 19:08 schrieb rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
> :
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117850
>
> --- Comment #3 from Richard Sandiford ---
> (In reply to rguent...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117806
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |uecker at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117857
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117857
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117834
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117858
Bug ID: 117858
Summary: [15 regression] openrct2-0.4.16 fails to build
(optional:823:52: error: incomplete type
‘std::__converts_from_optional’ used in
nested name
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117858
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 59752
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59752&action=edit
Staff.cpp.ii.xz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64526
--- Comment #8 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #7)
> I am not sure if this needed any more since now () means the same as (void)
> with C23 and GCC defaults to C23 ...
Some people may still wish to compile for earl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116561
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Thomas Schwinge from comment #1)
> This appears to be due to recent commit
> r15-3328-g673a448aa24efedd5ac140ebf7bfe652d7a6a846 "Optimize initialization
> of small padded objects".
>
> Given this c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19501
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112398
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64526
--- Comment #9 from Sam James ---
Of course, it's just about whether it's very important anymore. If it hasn't
happened by now, it probably won't. I nearly left a similar comment to pinskia.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117820
--- Comment #7 from Jerry DeLisle ---
The root of the problem here is that the function write_boz uses a type int to
pass in the value n, this value is then tested for zero which fails for a 64
bit integer.
The following hack makes it work but
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117862
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Gruber ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-14.2.0/gcc/Optimize-Options.html#index-
> fsemantic-interposition
>
> This is by design. You need -fno-semantic-interpositi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117837
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117837
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE: verify_cgraph_node |ICE: verify_cgraph_node
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117797
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pault at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #430 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #429)
> Could be related https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117770
You mean comment #419?
If you could merge 59432 and 59550 into your tree and re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117862
--- Comment #4 from Sam James ---
It's a common footgun in ELF. :)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117859
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e1009b3de2d05782ae1e0c62f9e81da14c4d6156
commit r15-5844-ge1009b3de2d05782ae1e0c62f9e81da14c4d6156
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date: Sa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117859
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Andrew Pinski :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:24949e640307f91a831e0fb699fea85fb9276a09
commit r15-5843-g24949e640307f91a831e0fb699fea85fb9276a09
Author: Andrew Pinski
Date: Sa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117859
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116561
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note I think there is still a rust front-end issue. Because if error_mark_node
is making a difference that should not happen since error_mark_node should not
happen as a type unless there is an error and the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116561
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #429 from Oleg Endo ---
Could be related https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117770
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117860
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117834
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117858
--- Comment #11 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c2c7d71eeeab7c6e2a8124b53d6eae6c59781e79
commit r15-5833-gc2c7d71eeeab7c6e2a8124b53d6eae6c59781e79
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117834
--- Comment #7 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #6)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> > This is not going to be fixed. Mac OS X 10.4 has not been supported for
> > years now as GCC. At least update to Ma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117859
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 59755
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59755&action=edit
gimple testcase
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117818
--- Comment #5 from Steven Munroe ---
I expected compiling for -mcpu=power9 to do a better job generating splats for
small constants.
Given the new instructions like VSX Vector Splat Immediate Byte (xxspltib) and
Vector Extend Sign Byte To Word
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117818
--- Comment #4 from Steven Munroe ---
Created attachment 59756
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59756&action=edit
Updated Test case Vector shift long with const shift count -mcpu=power9
This is an extension of the original w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117865
Bug ID: 117865
Summary: "error: too many arguments to function" with C23
doesn't show function pointer location
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117865
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 59757
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59757&action=edit
paths.i.xz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117865
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
```
struct p {
int (*bar)();
};
void baz() {
struct p q;
q.bar(1);
}
```
```
$ gcc /tmp/a.c
/tmp/a.c: In function ‘baz’:
/tmp/a.c:7:5: error: too many arguments to function ‘q.bar’
7 |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117866
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117866
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Semi reduced:
```
struct XYspace {
void (*convert)(struct fractpoint *pt);
} ;
struct fractpoint {
double x,y;
} ;
struct segment {
struct fractpoint dest;
} ;
void t1_Loc(register st
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100064
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note you could also do:
`f(&b.parent);`
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100064
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117867
Bug ID: 117867
Summary: -Wfatal-errors vs -fmax-errors=1 inconsistency
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97687
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117867
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
Maybe a dupe of PR97687?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117867
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117859
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
Patch posted:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-December/670483.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110405
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://github.com/dtcxzyw/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117859
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Actually the problem is lim in the first place:
t.c.149t.lim2: _50 = _59 != 0;
That is not Canonical since _59 is a bool ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117863
Bug ID: 117863
Summary: Missing pcmpeq splitters
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48091
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14030
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||eerott at gmail dot com
--- Comment #7 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14030
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 92212 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26732
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92212
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117866
Bug ID: 117866
Summary: Confusing 'expected ... but argument is of type ...'
(same type repeated)
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diag
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117476
--- Comment #36 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e4c1b3d45a33cfb9d76be11c362f81aa77e29882
commit r15-5836-ge4c1b3d45a33cfb9d76be11c362f81aa77e29882
Author: Alexey Merzlyakov
Date: S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112398
--- Comment #10 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e4c1b3d45a33cfb9d76be11c362f81aa77e29882
commit r15-5836-ge4c1b3d45a33cfb9d76be11c362f81aa77e29882
Author: Alexey Merzlyakov
Date: S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117858
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Looks like a copy & paste error in r15-2309-g6d86486292acbe:
--- a/libstdc++-v3/include/std/optional
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/std/optional
@@ -1043,7 +1043,7 @@ _GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_VERSION
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117858
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Actually it should be:
--- a/libstdc++-v3/include/std/optional
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/std/optional
@@ -1043,7 +1043,7 @@ _GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_VERSION
template
#ifdef _GLIBCXX_USE_CONSTRA
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84245
kargls at comcast dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargls at comcast dot net
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117858
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117858
--- Comment #13 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:abed4806ddd75d4450c40f4064977024be460f4c
commit r15-5834-gabed4806ddd75d4450c40f4064977024be460f4c
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14030
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana.radhakrishnan@codito
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117866
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Confusing 'expected ... but |[15 regression] Confusing
1 - 100 of 115 matches
Mail list logo
