https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16663
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80684
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|ASSIGNED
ithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 15.0.1 20250301 (experimental) (GCC)
```
(Install with `sudo make DESTDIR=/opt/gcc-git install`)
Content of `/opt/gcc-git/lib64/libstdc++.modules.json`:
```json
{
"version": 1,
"revision": 1,
"modules": [
{
"logical-name&
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119082
Bug ID: 119082
Summary: GCC Incorrectly Accepts Explicit Destructor Call for
Scalar Type in constexpr Context
Product: gcc
Version: 13.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119081
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I am not even sure if prefix of / is valid use case. Shouldn't it be /usr ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119012
--- Comment #11 from Levi Zim ---
When building 14.2.1+r711+g3228df20cfa3, I got a different object that is
different between stage 2 and 3:
Comparing stages 2 and 3
Bootstrap comparison failure!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119082
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004
Bug 55004 depends on bug 119082, which changed state.
Bug 119082 Summary: GCC Incorrectly Accepts Explicit Destructor Call for Scalar
Type in constexpr Context
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119082
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118934
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |law at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69374
--- Comment #30 from GCC Commits ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Gerald Pfeifer :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4fee152dc36ba6ffa39dd29b6493dc1840374b05
commit r15--g4fee152dc36ba6ffa39dd29b6493dc1840374b05
Author: Gerald Pfeifer
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119073
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
struct A { ~A (); };
struct B { B (const A &a = A ()); int *begin (); int *end (); ~B (); };
void
foo (bool x)
{
for (auto i : (x ? B{} : B{}))
;
}
ICEs as well.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118765
--- Comment #13 from uecker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Yes thanks, I need to analyze this a bit more but I narrowed the problem down
to this.
What do you mean by "my non-toy sources compiles/works correctly now"? There
should be no existing code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119078
Bug ID: 119078
Summary: Abstract bind(c) interface should not be a global
entity
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119078
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic, needs-stdcheck
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119079
--- Comment #1 from Tibor Győri ---
Created attachment 60630
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60630&action=edit
Intel manual page for MOVSX/MOVSXD
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119079
Bug ID: 119079
Summary: Intel assembly output should use MOVSXD instead of
MOVSX for 32b->64b sign extensions
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
URL: https://gcc.godbolt.org/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119012
--- Comment #12 from Levi Zim ---
The bad commit is 3228df20cfa3581015dc32657eb17d6f24af3104 "rtl: Remove invalid
compare simplification" [PR117186]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119012
--- Comment #10 from Levi Zim ---
Sometimes I didn't get the comparison failure but a hard ICE instead:
*** stack smashing detected ***: terminated
during RTL pass: combine
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119080
Bug ID: 119080
Summary: Poor error message when parameter type is unknown
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119076
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 60631
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60631&action=edit
test script
This is the testscript which I used to reproduce the ICE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117178
--- Comment #27 from Andrew Clayton ---
Thanks for the update!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119076
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
Trying to reduce this.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117919
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Filip Kastl :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5349aa2accdf34a7bf9cabd1447878aaadfc0e87
commit r15-7779-g5349aa2accdf34a7bf9cabd1447878aaadfc0e87
Author: Filip Kastl
Date: Sun M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117919
Filip Kastl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119080
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16663
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||higher.performance.github@g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119083
Bug ID: 119083
Summary: Remove SSE_FIRST_REG from ix86_class_likely_spilled_p
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71093
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||qurong at ios dot ac.cn
--- Comment #8 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119077
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119082
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119076
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
here is the full backtrace:
In file included from ./include/nlohmann/json.hpp:60,
of module ./json.hpp, imported at main.cxx:1:
./include/nlohmann/detail/output/serializer.hpp: In instantiation of ‘static
ui
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118765
--- Comment #12 from Hime Haieto ---
This is a good weekend indeed! While I can't say that all is well, this patch
is good progress - at least one of my non-toy sources compiles/works correctly
now with workarounds.
It seems like if you typede
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119076
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|1 |0
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117047
--- Comment #44 from Jakub Jelinek ---
In any case, libgccjit should be fixed to use just
ggc_internal_alloc instead of ggc_internal_cleared_alloc in the operator new so
that one doesn't actually even think of relying on the zero initialization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119058
--- Comment #6 from Alejandro Colomar ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> (In reply to Alejandro Colomar from comment #3)
> > Not yet. I commented it yesterday with Aaron Ballman during a break in the
> > C Committee meeting, and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115871
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6589eb4efe39545ec7f7e641e1d302c89b260350
commit r15-7769-g6589eb4efe39545ec7f7e641e1d302c89b260350
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119058
--- Comment #3 from Alejandro Colomar ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> Plus why not just use casts?
They tend to be dangerous when misplaced or when their type is accidentally
wrong.
For example, the following could be diagno
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115871
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[14/15 Regression] ICE with |[14 Regression] ICE with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119058
--- Comment #4 from Alejandro Colomar ---
I can still show the paper to other members of the C Committee, though, to see
their opinion. But I prefer not proposing it officially.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119058
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117047
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117047
--- Comment #45 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8c15a6cefa0d1f8ec12701af1f528f473c33ff6b
commit r15-7770-g8c15a6cefa0d1f8ec12701af1f528f473c33ff6b
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118981
--- Comment #50 from Erich Löw ---
Q_1
What would happen if saying (just hypothetically)
--> All prios in range 0 ... 2^^16 - 1 are allowed
--> Imho consequence of removing split in reserved and not-reserved prios.
Q_2
Without usage of [[gnu::i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119071
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112465
john henning changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mailboxnotfound at yahoo dot
com
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119074
Bug ID: 119074
Summary: Mismatched arguments for external dummy argument not
caught
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117787
Jiang An changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||de34 at live dot cn
--- Comment #2 from Jian
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119075
Bug ID: 119075
Summary: LWG4140 seems incompletely implemented
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-valid
Severity: normal
Priority
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119076
Bug ID: 119076
Summary: ICE with Segmentation fault if using PCH
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: pch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119076
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|pch |c++
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119075
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Reading pr 115098 seems to this on purpose.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113815
--- Comment #2 from Pascal Pignard ---
No more error but warning still remains with version 14.2:
% gcc -c -gnatv -gnat2022 test_20200613_decl.adb
GNAT 14.2.0
Copyright 1992-2024, Free Software Foundation, Inc.
Compiling: 2020/test_20200613_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119052
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:dfdbad87aeb2deff9e13a394659ac7b37173648a
commit r15-7772-gdfdbad87aeb2deff9e13a394659ac7b37173648a
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114222
--- Comment #6 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:898f22d15805229a932fff7f22a0a8054e1b9b31
commit r15-7773-g898f22d15805229a932fff7f22a0a8054e1b9b31
Author: Jan Dubiec
Date: Sat Mar 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118906
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a0d29dd218e7d96f0715360a2ab6fdd8dc9b3446
commit r15-7774-ga0d29dd218e7d96f0715360a2ab6fdd8dc9b3446
Author: Yuriy Kolerov
Date: Sat Ma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118906
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119052
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119073
Bug ID: 119073
Summary: [14/15 Regression] ICE in cp_gimplify_expr, at
cp/cp-gimplify.cc:911 with temporary vector in
range-for
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119073
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[14/15 Regression] ICE in |[15 Regression] ICE in
|c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119071
--- Comment #9 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
WRT c#8. That would be a bit of a surprise. In *theory* it just allowed us to
remove reg->reg moves when the source and destination where the same reg. So
if that caused a regression I suspect it was jus
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119073
--- Comment #3 from Philipp Fent ---
Thanks for mentioning it Andrew, this indeed seems to be related to a
behavioral change in range-for lifetimes in C++23.
I found commit 650e915 from Jakub Jelinek that implements the new behavior.
There's als
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119073
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[15 Regression] ICE in |[15 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110338
Bug 110338 depends on bug 117787, which changed state.
Bug 117787 Summary: [C++26] P3247R2 - Deprecating the notion of trivial types
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117787
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117787
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119073
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Next time please mention the full command line which is causing the ICE and NOT
just give a link to godbolt for the command line.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66943
--- Comment #11 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
I think having -Wignored-pragma-omp would be useful:
1. It is useful to have a warning that warns that you need to use -fopenmp for
#pragma omp to have an effect.
2. However, it is very common to wan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100922
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99089
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119073
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19466
Bug 19466 depends on bug 97747, which changed state.
Bug 97747 Summary: [12/13/14/15 Regression] missed combine opt with logical ops
after zero extended load
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97747
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119073
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 60624
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60624&action=edit
Reduced testcase
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117178
--- Comment #26 from Sam James ---
Jakub's revised patch:
https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/Z63vQc7tBvolrk27@tucnak/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119073
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|jakub at redhat dot com|jakub at gcc dot
gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119073
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92656
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71942
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97747
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119076
--- Comment #2 from trinxery at firemail dot cc ---
Created attachment 60626
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60626&action=edit
preprocessed json.hpp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119076
--- Comment #3 from trinxery at firemail dot cc ---
and main.cxx is:
# 0 "./main.cxx"
# 0 ""
# 0 ""
# 1 "/usr/include/stdc-predef.h" 1 3 4
# 0 "" 2
# 1 "./main.cxx"
import "././include/nlohmann/json.hpp" [[__translated]];
# 1 "/usr/include/c++/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117047
--- Comment #47 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ff38712bcba97ff9cba168a4e864c5a8ac453b7f
commit r15-7776-gff38712bcba97ff9cba168a4e864c5a8ac453b7f
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119077
Bug ID: 119077
Summary: gcc option -mint8 leads to undefined reference to
`__builtin_avr_delay_cycles'
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118061
--- Comment #3 from uecker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 60627
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60627&action=edit
patch
Patch adding checking for errors.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118765
--- Comment #11 from uecker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 60628
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60628&action=edit
patch
Tentative fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118981
--- Comment #51 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Erich Löw from comment #50)
> Q_1
> What would happen if saying (just hypothetically)
> --> All prios in range 0 ... 2^^16 - 1 are allowed
> --> Imho consequence of removing split in reserved
84 matches
Mail list logo
