: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rafal at rawicki dot org
In file ./libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/exception (also in trunk) bits/exception_ptr.h
is included conditionally:
#if
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58938
Rafał Rawicki changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rafal at rawicki dot org
--- Comment #3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58938
--- Comment #4 from Rafał Rawicki ---
(In reply to Rafał Rawicki from comment #3)
> This is a regression, because a more specific _GLIBCXX_ATOMIC_BUILTINS_4 was
> defined (but is no longer available) and now there is defined
> ATOMIC_INT_LOCK_FREE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58938
--- Comment #9 from Rafał Rawicki ---
I'm sorry about my confusion of ATOMIC_INT_LOCK_FREE and
_GLIBCXX_ATOMIC_BUILTINS meaning.
In the meantime I've checked, when ATOMIC_INT_LOCK_FREE is defined as 2 and the
target platform I have problems with
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rafal at rawicki dot org
Consider following code:
#include
#include
struct A
{
struct B
{
struct C
{
C(): m(5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59125
--- Comment #8 from Rafał Rawicki ---
I'm hurt by this bug too. Is there a chance of porting the fix to 4.8.3
release?
I see that simple cherry-picking this patch onto 4.8 line is not possible,
because 4.8 and 4.9 branches diverged too much.
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: rafal at rawicki dot org
Consider following code:
$ cat foo.cpp
#include
uint16_t foo(uint8_t * x)
{
return (uint16_t)(x[0] << 0) | (uint16_t)(x[1] << 8);
}
It
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57899
--- Comment #11 from Rafał Rawicki ---
Created attachment 31909
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31909&action=edit
C-reduced testcase
I've c-reduced given testcase. Compare lines 103 and 115, I think the problem
lies here.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57899
--- Comment #13 from Rafał Rawicki ---
Right, the reduced testcase is invalid. I'll try to generate a valid one.
In the meantime, I looked at the corresponding place in (gcc
4.8.2):
1125 /**
1126* If the argument is a bind expression, we
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57899
--- Comment #14 from Rafał Rawicki ---
Created attachment 31910
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31910&action=edit
C-reduced testcase with valid code
C-reduce seems to be very stubborn in removing these parentheses, but this
te
10 matches
Mail list logo
