https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92137
Daniel Gutson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||danielgutson at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51897
Bug #: 51897
Summary: command line option to create a namespace alias
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: ipa
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: danielgutson at gmail dot com
CC: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
The following code
void f(int& x)
{
x = 1;
}
int main()
{
int a;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85617
--- Comment #2 from Daniel Gutson ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> I doubt we want to make this warning to be flow sensitive at all. There are
> many other warnings which are flow sensitive and they change behavior
> between dif
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85617
--- Comment #4 from Daniel Gutson ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> The warning really can't be implemented later than in the FE, because many
> of the non-setting uses are optimized away already during the FEs. So there
> is no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85617
--- Comment #5 from Daniel Gutson ---
Additionally, could you please consider to gently leave this issue open as an
enhancement?
: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: danielgutson at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
__builtin_trap() cannot be used as a breakpointing mechanism because the
optimizer removes all subsequent code:
#include
int main
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84595
--- Comment #3 from Daniel Gutson ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> What you want is __builtin_breakpoint (if that existed). Trap is considered
> as noreturn just like abort/exit.
OK. That was my second suggested alternative.
BT
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84595
--- Comment #5 from Daniel Gutson ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> (In reply to Daniel Gutson from comment #3)
> > OK. That was my second suggested alternative.
> > BTW I didn't see __builtin_trap documented as noreturn in the do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84595
--- Comment #8 from Daniel Gutson ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #7)
> I frequently use raise(SIGSTOP) ... (or x86 specific you can do asm ("int
> 3");
> or whatever that break thing was...
>
> Note I think that a compiler-only-sid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88050
--- Comment #3 from Daniel Gutson ---
It is not the same and doesn't cover important cases: for example, the opposite
one, there is a nontrivial copy ctor implementation but there is no nontrivial
dtor. Or even between the special ctors, or there
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81469
--- Comment #3 from Daniel Gutson ---
Any update on this? Could someone review the proposed patch?
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: danielgutson at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 42591
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzi
13 matches
Mail list logo
