Re: bug in bit structure compilation

On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 4:19 PM Geoff Mulligan wrote: > > Version: > gcc -v > Using built-in specs. > COLLECT_GCC=gcc > COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/7/lto-wrapper > OFFLOAD_TARGET_NAMES=nvptx-none > OFFLOAD_TARGET_DEFAULT=1 > Target: x86_64-linux-gnu > Configured with: ../src/

Re: compiler produces an error message

On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 8:55 AM lexa kop via Gcc-bugs wrote: > > [ver]i try compile it on gcc 11 and gcc 12 > [new features]i use gcc modules features(module;export module, import, > import export) > [command]g++ *.cpp -std=c++20 -fmodules-ts > /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/12.0.0/include/g++-v

Re: About ' * ' not recognized

On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 5:05 PM naoki ueda via Gcc-bugs wrote: > > When I tried to execute the attached file mycalc.c with a command line > argument, it could not be executed normally only in the case of '*'. > '+', '-' and '/' can be executed normally, but the compiler cannot > execute '*' normal

Re: XMM/YMM assembly bloat

On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 2:14 PM Owen Cook via Gcc-bugs wrote: > > Adding white space/newlines outside the function also affect the length of > assembly. Note -march=native is dependent on the machine which is being used. IIRC godbolt uses a few different machines and that means the answer which -

Re: [Bug regression/103997] [12 Regression] gcc.target/i386/pr88531-??.c scan-assembler-times FAILs

On Sat, Jan 29, 2022 at 2:40 PM write2mark1--- via Gcc-bugs wrote: > > Why does gcc use CVS and not git GCC has used git for ~2 years now and before that it was using svn for ~14 years; before that used cvs for ~8 years and then used rcs (though the overlap between rcs and cvs is real). GCC's git

Re: ICE on trunk with combination of "-Og -fcontracts", repro link in body

Please file a bug to bugzilla. With attaching the source there. This list is for automated emails from bugzilla really and most folks are not tracking the list. Thanks, Andrew On Mon, Jan 2, 2023 at 10:16 AM Gavin Ray via Gcc-bugs wrote: > > Hit the following ICE today, just sharing here to be h

Re: ICE on trunk with combination of "-Og -fcontracts", repro link in body

On Mon, Jan 2, 2023 at 10:21 AM Gavin Ray wrote: > > I tried but it won't allow me to create an issue on the bugzilla, it says > "account creation is not allowed at this time" Directly from https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/createaccount.cgi : "Because of spam, account creation through this form is r

Re: Compilation of rust-demangle.c fails on MinGW

On Wed, Aug 4, 2021 at 8:46 AM Eli Zaretskii via Gcc-bugs wrote: > > > Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2021 15:41:30 +0100 > > From: Jonathan Wakely > > Cc: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, e...@gnu.org > > > > > The libiberty README says to report bugs to gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org. > > > > Well that needs to be fixed. It shou

Re: [PATCH] match.pd: Implement missed optimization (x << c) >> c -> -(x & 1) [PR101955]

On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 7:47 AM Drew Ross via Gcc-bugs wrote: > > PR middle-end/101955 > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > * match.pd (x << c) >> c -> -(x & 1): New simplification. > > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: > > * gcc.dg/pr101955.c: New test. > --- > gcc/match.pd|

Re: [PATCH] match.pd: Implement missed optimization (x << c) >> c -> -(x & 1) [PR101955]

On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 8:17 AM Andrew Pinski wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 7:47 AM Drew Ross via Gcc-bugs > wrote: > > > > PR middle-end/101955 > > > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > > > * match.pd (x << c) >> c -> -(x & 1): New simplification. > > > > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: > > > >

Re: Compiler bug with bitfields

On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 8:06 PM libreknight via Gcc-bugs wrote: > > Greetings. > > I have come across erroneous behavior whilst comparing optimizations > performed by different compilers. Said behavior persists through > different versions of GCC and flags. The output from GCC is incorrect > and d

Re: Y2038: GCC gthr-posix.h weakref symbol invoking function has impact on time values

On Sun, Apr 16, 2023 at 10:41 PM Puneet Kumar Yatnal (QUIC) via Gcc-bugs wrote: > > > ++ > From: Puneet Kumar Yatnal (QUIC) > Sent: Monday, April 17, 2023 9:26 AM > To: gcc-h...@gcc.gnu.org > Subject: Y2038: GCC gthr-posix.h wekref symbol invoking function has impact > on time values First gcc-b

Re: for discussion: should we close all the Java-related bugs?

On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 11:28 AM Abe Skolnik via Gcc-bugs wrote: > > Dear all, > > AFAIK, GCJ has been dead for _years_... quoting > : "As of GCC 7, the GCC Java frontend and > associated libjava runtime library have been removed from GCC. The > information on thi

Re: Strange compile error when g++ work with std=c++20.

On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 8:24 PM Lew Robin via Gcc-bugs wrote: > > This error happens when using macro and template. > GCC Version: gcc version 12.3.0 (Ubuntu 12.3.0-1ubuntu1~22.04) > OS: ubuntu 22.04 (x64) > Compile Command: > g++-12 ./testmacro.cc --std=c++20 > > In fact, this error exisits from

Re: _BitInt() as underlying enum type

On Sat, Jan 27, 2024 at 6:07 PM Thomas Voss via Gcc-bugs wrote: > > Hi all, > > Earlier today I decided to clone the GCC repo and build the latest code > just to play around with some new C23 features. One thing I attempted > was the following: > > typedef _BitInt(128) underlying; > enum

Re: _BitInt() as underlying enum type

On Sat, Jan 27, 2024 at 6:24 PM Andrew Pinski wrote: > > On Sat, Jan 27, 2024 at 6:07 PM Thomas Voss via Gcc-bugs > wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > Earlier today I decided to clone the GCC repo and build the latest code > > just to play around with some new C23 features. One thing I attempted > >

Re: about "rename"

On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 3:43 PM naoki ueda via Gcc-bugs wrote: > > Although "rename" is not a reserved word, there would be a name conflict if > you used it as a function name. The rename function is defined as part of the ISO C 90 standard. Therefore it is considered reserved. Also this mailing

Re: Is this a bug is 14.2.0?

On Thu, Sep 26, 2024 at 2:57 AM Jonathan Wakely via Gcc-bugs wrote: > > On 26/09/24 04:44 +, Jason Mancini wrote: > >Problem happens in 14.2.0, 13.2.0, 12.2.0 > >Doesn't seem to happen in 10.2.0 or 11.2.0 > >Only seems to happen for -std=c++17/14/11, but not for c++20/23/26. > >Only seems to h

Re: GCC Fails to Compile When Command Line Argument Size Exceeds 128KB

On Sun, Feb 2, 2025 at 8:31 PM Geeta Dora via Gcc-bugs wrote: > > Dear GCC Developers, > > I encountered an issue where GCC fails to compile when the total > command-line argument > size exceeds 128KB. > > In contrast, Clang can handle the same compilation scenario without issues. > > Is this a kn

Re: GCC Fails to Compile When Command Line Argument Size Exceeds 128KB

On Sun, Feb 2, 2025 at 8:57 PM Geeta Dora wrote: > > Thank you. I wanted to mention that on Linux, even when using a response > file, we still encounter the same issue if the response file exceeds 128KB in > size. > > Does this imply that GCC enforces a limit on individual command-line > argu

Re: accumulate with multiplies as reduction returns wrong result.

On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 6:52 PM Kok How Teh via Gcc-bugs wrote: > > vector a = {3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14}; > assert(43589145600 == accumulate(a.begin(), a.end(), 1, multiplies())); > > That assertion fails! What do I miss? You missed that 1 is in type int and you want to accumulate