https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96746
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
||2020-08-24
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
Confirmed.
|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25814
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
||2020-08-26
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org,
||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone|--- |10.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25814
--- Comment #17 from Marek Polacek ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #16)
> (In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #15)
> > David, presumably you're not working on this at the moment?
> You're correct. Sorry about that. Switching bac
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93529
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88323
Bug 88323 depends on bug 93529, which changed state.
Bug 93529 Summary: Implement P1009R2, Array size deduction in new-expressions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93529
What|Removed |Added
-
|constructor in template |parse templated constructor
|class |in template class
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
Last reconfirmed
||needs-bisection
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfirmed||2020-08-31
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
Confirmed. Not a dup of 96282 because that
||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
Dup.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 96805 ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96805
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc-bugs at marehr dot
dialup.fu-b
||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfirmed||2020-08-31
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
||a/show_bug.cgi?id=94691
||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
Looks like a dup.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 95291 ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95291
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mateusz.pusz at gmail dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95291
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
When fixing, let's make sure that bug 96874 is fixed too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96876
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96871
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96863
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96863
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|11.0|9.4
Summary|[11 Regression] I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96868
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96884
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77841
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
In C++20, this should also work:
new char[4](1,2,3,4);
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
struct A {
A(char);
};
class B {
const A ary[64];
B (const A a[]) : ary{a} { }
};
generates 1 + 64 error messages:
array3.C:7:21
||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed||2020-09-02
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
Confirmed. Started with r277733
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96905
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
It looks like we've never cp_genericized the consteval function.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92812
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88323
Bug 88323 depends on bug 92812, which changed state.
Bug 92812 Summary: Implement P1975R0: Fixing the wording of parenthesized
aggregate-initialization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92812
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84930
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kirshamir at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96936
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87530
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
No longer accepted since r11-2411. The test should probably be added.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95164
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91483
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Related test:
void
foo ()
{
constexpr int a = 0;
constexpr const int *p = &a;
}
We just say
error: ‘& a’ is not a constant expression
but that's inadequate. clang++ now says
note: address of non-stati
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95164
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Summary|[9/10/11 Reg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77841
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfirmed||2020-09-09
Keywords||wrong-code
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
Confirmed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97010
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96994
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Yes, a way to fix this would be to do the build_functional_cast in
check_initializer:
6892 else if (DECL_DECLARED_CONSTEXPR_P (decl)
6893|| (flags & LOOKUP_CONSTINIT))
6894
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97010
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek
||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> It also ICEs on trunk. I think I've seen this ICE before so there might be
> a duplicate.
Yup
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91241
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tangyixuan at mail dot
dlut.edu.cn
---
|RESOLVED
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Yeah, I don't expect this to be backported to 9, sorry.
||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfirmed||2020-09-11
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
Confirmed.
|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
Confirmed. 10 ICEs too.
||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfirmed||2020-09-11
Ever confirmed|0 |1
at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
|1
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Summary|ICE on C++20 code: |[11 Regression] ICE on
|gcc_assert failure in |C++20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91741
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek
|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Version|og10 (devel/omp/gcc-10) |11.0
--- Comment #1 from Marek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97050
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Reduced:
namespace a {
template constexpr bool f = __is_same_as(d, e);
}
struct g {};
struct h;
template auto operator+(i, j) {
auto k = [](auto l) requires a::f{};
return k;
}
void m() {
struct n {
|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
Confirmed.
||rejects-valid
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
Confirmed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97051
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
This compiles when __builtin_is_constant_evaluated is used instead.
|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
Summary|ICE in subspan, at |[9/10/11 Regression] ICE in
|input.h:69 |subspan, at input.h:69
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96935
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
Started with r269125. Use -O to reproduce.
Bizarrely, it goes away when -Wall is in effect!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96935
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek ---
Candidate fix:
--- a/gcc/input.c
+++ b/gcc/input.c
@@ -1461,6 +1461,8 @@ get_substring_ranges_for_loc (cpp_reader *pfile,
size_t literal_length = finish.column - start.column + 1;
/* Ensure th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97034
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
// PR c++/97034
namespace N {
template struct S {
template S(T, U);
};
} // namespace N
template struct E {
template struct G { T t; };
void fn() { G{N::S{'a', 1}}; }
};
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97034
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
The same ICE can be triggered with
template
struct E {
template
struct G {
T t;
G(T) { }
};
void fn() { G{1}; }
};
which started with r269093.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97034
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Another, valid, where C++20 aggregate CTAD should work:
template
struct E {
template
struct G {
T t;
};
void fn() { G{1}; }
};
void
g () {
E e;
e.fn ();
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96935
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10/11 Regression] ICE in |[9/10 Regression] ICE in
||2020-09-16
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Fixed by r11-1571.
||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0 |1
||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Confirmed.
[temp.deduct.guide]#3:
A deduction-guide shall be declared in the same scope as the corresponding
class template and, for a member class
||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
Fixed by r11-2748.
|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Still accepted.
||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
Properly rejected now, fixed by r10-7236.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79501
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jeanmichael.celerier@gmail.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86403
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79501
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96935
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10 Regression] ICE in|[9 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58156
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68828
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67491
Bug 67491 depends on bug 68828, which changed state.
Bug 68828 Summary: [concepts] ICE in fold with requires and function call
around parameters
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68828
What|Removed |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35098
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87032
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87530
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91525
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86002
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96223
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfirmed||2020-09-17
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
Confirmed.
++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
We fail to give the "redeclared" errors in the following test:
template struct S { };
// [temp.deduct.guide]p3: Two deduction guide declarations in the same
// t
++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
$ ./cc1plus -quiet class-deduction-alias1.C
class-deduction-alias1.C:6:20: error: ‘concept’ does not name a type
6 | template concept Int = __is_same_as (T, int
||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
|1
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97125
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97125
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96863
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96863
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
struct b {
constexpr b() : c() {}
[[no_unique_address]] struct a {} c;
};
struct d {
constexpr d() : c() {}
int c;
};
struct e : b, d {};
class f {
float g = 1.0f;
e h;
} i;
|--- |DUPLICATE
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
Dup.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 96863 ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90199
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90199
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97125
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
We crash because now the C FE uses a SWITCH_STMT in the else branch:
2766 /* Compute the hash of the else branch. */
2767 inchash::hash hstate1 (0);
2768 inchash::add_expr (elseb, hstate1);
2769 has
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97125
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97125
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
I think we just want to call do_warn_duplicated_branches_r after we've lowered
control statements:
--- a/gcc/c-family/c-gimplify.c
+++ b/gcc/c-family/c-gimplify.c
@@ -533,10 +533,6 @@ c_genericize (tree fnde
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97099
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
||patch
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
Last reconfirmed||2020-09-21
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53610
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96994
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #8 from Marek Polacek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90583
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94404
Bug 94404 depends on bug 90583, which changed state.
Bug 90583 Summary: Implement DR 1722, lambda to function pointer conversion
should be noexcept
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90583
What|Removed
601 - 700 of 9189 matches
Mail list logo
