https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79755
Nicholas Krause changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xerofoify at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79755
--- Comment #8 from Nicholas Krause ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #7)
> This does happen even with 9.2 and current trunk, you just need to read the
> first line in #c0.
While I ran it as on a Ubuntu 9.2 Toolchain configured as:
Usi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79755
--- Comment #9 from Nicholas Krause ---
Sorry source code is:
void foo () {}
#pragma weak foo = _foo
int _foo = 0;
Copy and Pasted line numbers by mistake.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79755
--- Comment #12 from Nicholas Krause ---
Sorry about not reading the comment carefully.
I'm not if this helps but after looking at the change to this file:
https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc/trunk/gcc/cgraph.c?r1=199577&r2=199576&pathrev=199577
n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79755
--- Comment #13 from Nicholas Krause ---
Please forget the previous comment in verify_edge_corresponds_to_fndecl we need
to switch it to this:
if (e->callee->former_clone_of != node->symbol.decl
&& (!n->symbol.cpp_implicit_alias
|| e->cal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79755
Nicholas Krause changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xerofoify at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79755
--- Comment #15 from Nicholas Krause ---
(In reply to Nicholas Krause from comment #14)
> Created attachment 48052 [details]
> Patch for this bug
After tracking this down to the new function that replaced
verify_edge_corresponds_to_fndecl, cgrap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79755
--- Comment #17 from Nicholas Krause ---
Sorry about that. I've managed to track it down to a problem with a alias issue
And from reading the code in the original cvs commit. I'm not able to read it
currently but the original function mentioned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89116
Nicholas Krause changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xerofoify at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89116
--- Comment #7 from Nicholas Krause ---
(In reply to Arseny Solokha from comment #6)
> (In reply to Nicholas Krause from comment #5)
> > PR84508 does not seem to be reproducible on trunk now as last commented by
> > Arseny on trunk. Not sure abou
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93092
Nicholas Krause changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xerofoify at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94216
Nicholas Krause changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xerofoify at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94217
Nicholas Krause changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xerofoify at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94217
--- Comment #3 from Nicholas Krause ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #2)
> (In reply to Nicholas Krause from comment #1)
> > Hi Marin,
> > I've not sure if this is correct but it does not ICE with this fix:
> > tree off
,
||xerofoify at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from Nicholas Krause ---
After looking through the git history that last time this functions in your
trace were changed is by commit id,
db30281f0b2ff6dfc0c4146291baf020a27e4065. Martin Liska was the original
committer so
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94250
--- Comment #2 from Nicholas Krause ---
(In reply to Nicholas Krause from comment #1)
> After looking through the git history that last time this functions in your
> trace were changed is by commit id,
> db30281f0b2ff6dfc0c4146291baf020a27e4065.
,
||xerofoify at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 from Nicholas Krause ---
I've managed to track this down to what appears to me to be a issue in:
tree
push_inner_scope (tree inner)
{
tree outer = current_scope ();
if (!outer)
outer = current_name
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94255
--- Comment #3 from Nicholas Krause ---
I've managed to track this down to what appears to me to be a issue in:
tree
push_inner_scope (tree inner)
{
tree outer = current_scope ();
if (!outer)
outer = current_namespace;
push_inner_scope
,
||xerofoify at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from Nicholas Krause ---
Hi,
This does not seem to be happening in the middle end but in RTL expand. I've
tried on x86_64 trunk and now powerpc. Seems to only happen on PowerPC now as
seen here:
test.cpp: In fun
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90794
Nicholas Krause changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xerofoify at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90214
Nicholas Krause changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xerofoify at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46489
Nicholas Krause changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xerofoify at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92981
Nicholas Krause changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xerofoify at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87118
Nicholas Krause changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xerofoify at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87118
--- Comment #5 from Nicholas Krause ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=d3f2e41eae66b3699aaa6e2bfc4ce5b86cedd37e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94628
Nicholas Krause changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xerofoify at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94628
--- Comment #7 from Nicholas Krause ---
After adding this it seems to work for me, Patrick:
case TYPE_ARGUMENT_PACK:
if (value_dependent_expression_p(TREE_TYPE(*tp)))
return *tp;
if (TEMPLATE_TYPE_PARAMETER_PACK(*tp))
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94628
--- Comment #9 from Nicholas Krause ---
Created attachment 48318
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48318&action=edit
Possible Fix
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94628
--- Comment #10 from Nicholas Krause ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #8)
> (In reply to Nicholas Krause from comment #7)
> > After adding this it seems to work for me, Patrick:
> >case TYPE_ARGUMENT_PACK:
> > if (value_depe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90254
Nicholas Krause changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xerofoify at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89428
Nicholas Krause changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xerofoify at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95442
Nicholas Krause changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xerofoify at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95672
Nicholas Krause changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xerofoify at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94895
Nicholas Krause changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xerofoify at gmail dot com
: regression
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: xerofoify at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
After building gcc as such:
../gcc/configure --enable-lanuages=c,c++ --enable-threads -disable-multilibs
--enable-checking=yes --prefix=/home/xerofoify/obdjir
it fails
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93605
Nicholas Krause changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xerofoify at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93974
Nicholas Krause changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xerofoify at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93518
Nicholas Krause changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xerofoify at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94008
Nicholas Krause changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xerofoify at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88395
nik changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xerofoify at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88395
--- Comment #3 from Nicholas Krause ---
(In reply to Emmanuel Le Trong from comment #2)
> (In reply to Nicholas Krause from comment #1)
> > First off that's just a valid snippet without a class definition so I was
> > unable to build it against g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88395
--- Comment #6 from Nicholas Krause ---
Created attachment 45242
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45242&action=edit
Proposed Bug Fix
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88395
--- Comment #7 from Nicholas Krause ---
(In reply to Nicholas Krause from comment #6)
> Created attachment 45242 [details]
> Proposed Bug Fix
This is my proposed fix after tracing it and reading it carefully seems that
passing the NULL_TREE in r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91529
Nicholas Krause changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xerofoify at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80188
--- Comment #5 from nik ---
On 2018-01-17 02:15 AM, egallager at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80188
>
> --- Comment #4 from Eric Gallager ---
> (In reply to nik from comment #3)
>> Created attachment 423
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89796
Nicholas Krause changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xerofoify at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89796
--- Comment #3 from Nicholas Krause ---
(In reply to Arsène Pérard-Gayot from comment #2)
> (In reply to Nicholas Krause from comment #1)
> > I just compiled this like so:
> > ./bin/g++ test.cpp -fopenmp -Wall -fconcepts -o name test2.cpp
> > an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89796
--- Comment #4 from Nicholas Krause ---
(In reply to Nicholas Krause from comment #3)
> (In reply to Arsène Pérard-Gayot from comment #2)
> > (In reply to Nicholas Krause from comment #1)
> > > I just compiled this like so:
> > > ./bin/g++ test.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88395
--- Comment #9 from Nicholas Krause ---
(In reply to Nicholas Krause from comment #8)
> Created attachment 46334 [details]
> Proposed Proper Bug Fix
This is the proper bug fix after tracing it seems and looking at other callers
in that file. I t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88395
--- Comment #8 from Nicholas Krause ---
Created attachment 46334
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46334&action=edit
Proposed Proper Bug Fix
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56457
Nicholas Krause changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xerofoify at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88395
--- Comment #11 from Nicholas Krause ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #10)
> I don't think this is a valid testcase: operator+= requires Concept, but
> checking Concept depends on operator+=. It would be good for the compiler
> to det
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82230
nik changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xerofoify at gmail dot com
--- Comment #4 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80188
nik changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xerofoify at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80188
--- Comment #3 from nik ---
Created attachment 42372
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42372&action=edit
Proposed Fix Send to the GCC-Patches List
55 matches
Mail list logo
