* [Bug c++/101029] unexpected error: non-constant condition for static assertion in gcc 10/11, but not 9 (clang also fine)
2021-06-11 12:04 [Bug c++/101029] New: unexpected error: non-constant condition for static assertion in gcc 10/11, but not 9 (clang also fine) jim.w.walker at gmail dot com
@ 2021-06-11 12:05 ` jim.w.walker at gmail dot com
2021-06-11 12:17 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
` (13 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: jim.w.walker at gmail dot com @ 2021-06-11 12:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101029
--- Comment #1 from Jim Walker <jim.w.walker at gmail dot com> ---
Adding version output:
/opt/gcc-10.2.0/bin/g++ --version
g++ (GCC) 10.2.0
Copyright (C) 2020 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO
warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Thanks
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/101029] unexpected error: non-constant condition for static assertion in gcc 10/11, but not 9 (clang also fine)
2021-06-11 12:04 [Bug c++/101029] New: unexpected error: non-constant condition for static assertion in gcc 10/11, but not 9 (clang also fine) jim.w.walker at gmail dot com
2021-06-11 12:05 ` [Bug c++/101029] " jim.w.walker at gmail dot com
@ 2021-06-11 12:17 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-06-11 12:22 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
` (12 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-06-11 12:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101029
Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC| |marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfirmed| |2021-06-11
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Confirmed, reducing that right now..
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/101029] unexpected error: non-constant condition for static assertion in gcc 10/11, but not 9 (clang also fine)
2021-06-11 12:04 [Bug c++/101029] New: unexpected error: non-constant condition for static assertion in gcc 10/11, but not 9 (clang also fine) jim.w.walker at gmail dot com
2021-06-11 12:05 ` [Bug c++/101029] " jim.w.walker at gmail dot com
2021-06-11 12:17 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-06-11 12:22 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-06-11 13:41 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
` (11 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-06-11 12:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101029
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Jim Walker from comment #0)
> /opt/gcc-10.2.0/include/c++/10.2.0/type_traits:918:52: error: non-constant
> condition for static assertion
> 918 |
> static_assert(std::__is_complete_or_unbounded(__type_identity<_Tp>{}),
This assertion was added for gcc 10, which is why you don't see it with gcc 9.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/101029] unexpected error: non-constant condition for static assertion in gcc 10/11, but not 9 (clang also fine)
2021-06-11 12:04 [Bug c++/101029] New: unexpected error: non-constant condition for static assertion in gcc 10/11, but not 9 (clang also fine) jim.w.walker at gmail dot com
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2021-06-11 12:22 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-06-11 13:41 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-06-11 13:42 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
` (10 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-06-11 13:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101029
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 50985
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50985&action=edit
test-case
I see the following issue when not using an optimization level:
$ g++ gcc_issue.cc -c
gcc_issue.cc: In instantiation of ‘struct is_default_constructible<int>’:
gcc_issue.cc:10:8: required from ‘struct
__and_<is_default_constructible<int>, int, int>’
gcc_issue.cc:29:57: required by substitution of ‘template<class _U1, class
_U2, typename enable_if<__and_<is_default_constructible<_U1>, _U2,
int>::valuebool>::type <anonymous> > pair::pair() [with _U1 = int; _U2 = int;
typename enable_if<__and_<is_default_constructible<_U1>, _U2,
int>::valuebool>::type <anonymous> = <missing>]’
:126:31: required from here
gcc_issue.cc:18:43: error: non-constant condition for static assertion
18 | static_assert(__is_complete_or_unbounded(_Tp{}));
| ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~
gcc_issue.cc:18:43: in ‘constexpr’ expansion of
‘__is_complete_or_unbounded<int>(0).integral_constant<1>::operator
integral_constant<1>::value_type()’
gcc_issue.cc:18:43: internal compiler error: in cxx_eval_call_expression, at
cp/constexpr.c:2701
0x65e879 cxx_eval_call_expression
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/cp/constexpr.c:2701
0x9a0489 cxx_eval_constant_expression
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/cp/constexpr.c:6232
0x9acc6d cxx_eval_binary_expression
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/cp/constexpr.c:3187
0x99f86a cxx_eval_constant_expression
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/cp/constexpr.c:6590
0x9a3f47 cxx_eval_outermost_constant_expr
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/cp/constexpr.c:7264
0xb955e9 finish_static_assert(tree_node*, tree_node*, unsigned int, bool, bool)
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/cp/semantics.c:10306
0xb55ec3 tsubst_expr(tree_node*, tree_node*, int, tree_node*, bool)
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:18644
0xb55ec3 tsubst_expr(tree_node*, tree_node*, int, tree_node*, bool)
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:18096
0xb710e9 instantiate_class_template_1
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:12009
0xb710e9 instantiate_class_template(tree_node*)
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:12268
0xbbfe17 complete_type(tree_node*)
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/cp/typeck.c:143
0xbbfe17 complete_type(tree_node*)
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/cp/typeck.c:111
0xb7d116 lookup_member(tree_node*, tree_node*, int, bool, int,
access_failure_info*)
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/cp/search.c:1148
0xabbe97 lookup_qualified_name(tree_node*, tree_node*, LOOK_want, bool)
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/cp/name-lookup.c:7113
0xb366f9 tsubst_qualified_id
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:16364
0xb3889b tsubst_copy_and_build(tree_node*, tree_node*, int, tree_node*, bool,
bool)
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:19839
0xb54186 tsubst_expr(tree_node*, tree_node*, int, tree_node*, bool)
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:19082
0xb54186 tsubst_expr(tree_node*, tree_node*, int, tree_node*, bool)
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:18096
0xb5bf55 tsubst_template_arg(tree_node*, tree_node*, int, tree_node*)
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:12286
0xb5bf55 tsubst_template_arg(tree_node*, tree_node*, int, tree_node*)
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/cp/pt.c:12274
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
Please include the complete backtrace with any bug report.
See <https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/> for instructions.
while -O is fine:
$ g++ gcc_issue.cc -c -O
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/101029] unexpected error: non-constant condition for static assertion in gcc 10/11, but not 9 (clang also fine)
2021-06-11 12:04 [Bug c++/101029] New: unexpected error: non-constant condition for static assertion in gcc 10/11, but not 9 (clang also fine) jim.w.walker at gmail dot com
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2021-06-11 13:41 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-06-11 13:42 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-06-11 20:45 ` jason at gcc dot gnu.org
` (9 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-06-11 13:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101029
Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
@Jason: Can you please take a look?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/101029] unexpected error: non-constant condition for static assertion in gcc 10/11, but not 9 (clang also fine)
2021-06-11 12:04 [Bug c++/101029] New: unexpected error: non-constant condition for static assertion in gcc 10/11, but not 9 (clang also fine) jim.w.walker at gmail dot com
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2021-06-11 13:42 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-06-11 20:45 ` jason at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-06-11 22:20 ` [Bug c++/101029] [10/11/12 regression] " jason at gcc dot gnu.org
` (8 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: jason at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-06-11 20:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101029
Jason Merrill <jason at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/101029] [10/11/12 regression] unexpected error: non-constant condition for static assertion in gcc 10/11, but not 9 (clang also fine)
2021-06-11 12:04 [Bug c++/101029] New: unexpected error: non-constant condition for static assertion in gcc 10/11, but not 9 (clang also fine) jim.w.walker at gmail dot com
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2021-06-11 20:45 ` jason at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-06-11 22:20 ` jason at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-06-12 16:40 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: jason at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-06-11 22:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101029
Jason Merrill <jason at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Priority|P3 |P2
Summary|unexpected error: |[10/11/12 regression]
|non-constant condition for |unexpected error:
|static assertion in gcc |non-constant condition for
|10/11, but not 9 (clang |static assertion in gcc
|also fine) |10/11, but not 9 (clang
| |also fine)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/101029] [10/11/12 regression] unexpected error: non-constant condition for static assertion in gcc 10/11, but not 9 (clang also fine)
2021-06-11 12:04 [Bug c++/101029] New: unexpected error: non-constant condition for static assertion in gcc 10/11, but not 9 (clang also fine) jim.w.walker at gmail dot com
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2021-06-11 22:20 ` [Bug c++/101029] [10/11/12 regression] " jason at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-06-12 16:40 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-06-16 9:03 ` jim.w.walker at gmail dot com
` (6 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-06-12 16:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101029
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill <jason@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:08e1ff9d6e5a419d5b4a60c077df549e81601d9b
commit r12-1404-g08e1ff9d6e5a419d5b4a60c077df549e81601d9b
Author: Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
Date: Fri Jun 11 16:55:30 2021 -0400
c++: constexpr and array[0] [PR101029]
build_vec_init_elt exits early if we're initializing a zero-element array,
so build_vec_init needs to do the same to avoid trying to instantiate
things
after we've already started throwing important bits away.
PR c++/101029
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
* init.c (build_vec_init): Shortcut [0] case.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/ext/array4.C: New test.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/101029] [10/11/12 regression] unexpected error: non-constant condition for static assertion in gcc 10/11, but not 9 (clang also fine)
2021-06-11 12:04 [Bug c++/101029] New: unexpected error: non-constant condition for static assertion in gcc 10/11, but not 9 (clang also fine) jim.w.walker at gmail dot com
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2021-06-12 16:40 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-06-16 9:03 ` jim.w.walker at gmail dot com
2021-06-16 9:16 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: jim.w.walker at gmail dot com @ 2021-06-16 9:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101029
--- Comment #7 from Jim Walker <jim.w.walker at gmail dot com> ---
Thanks for the fast work on this issue. How does it work for gcc bugs in terms
of getting into a release? Would there be a 10.x release that includes this?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/101029] [10/11/12 regression] unexpected error: non-constant condition for static assertion in gcc 10/11, but not 9 (clang also fine)
2021-06-11 12:04 [Bug c++/101029] New: unexpected error: non-constant condition for static assertion in gcc 10/11, but not 9 (clang also fine) jim.w.walker at gmail dot com
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2021-06-16 9:03 ` jim.w.walker at gmail dot com
@ 2021-06-16 9:16 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-06-16 18:33 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-06-16 9:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101029
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
It's only fixed on trunk so far, which will become the 12.1 release in 10-11
months.
It's a regression, so either the compiler fix should get backported to the
release branches (including the gcc-10 branch) or the static_assert in the
standard library header should get removed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/develop.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/101029] [10/11/12 regression] unexpected error: non-constant condition for static assertion in gcc 10/11, but not 9 (clang also fine)
2021-06-11 12:04 [Bug c++/101029] New: unexpected error: non-constant condition for static assertion in gcc 10/11, but not 9 (clang also fine) jim.w.walker at gmail dot com
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2021-06-16 9:16 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-06-16 18:33 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-06-17 3:38 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-06-16 18:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101029
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Jason Merrill
<jason@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d92613ec5529cecd66ef0c21b894c7f70ace7f87
commit r11-8582-gd92613ec5529cecd66ef0c21b894c7f70ace7f87
Author: Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
Date: Fri Jun 11 16:55:30 2021 -0400
c++: constexpr and array[0] [PR101029]
build_vec_init_elt exits early if we're initializing a zero-element array,
so build_vec_init needs to do the same to avoid trying to instantiate
things
after we've already started throwing important bits away.
PR c++/101029
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
* init.c (build_vec_init): Shortcut [0] case.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/ext/array4.C: New test.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/101029] [10/11/12 regression] unexpected error: non-constant condition for static assertion in gcc 10/11, but not 9 (clang also fine)
2021-06-11 12:04 [Bug c++/101029] New: unexpected error: non-constant condition for static assertion in gcc 10/11, but not 9 (clang also fine) jim.w.walker at gmail dot com
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2021-06-16 18:33 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-06-17 3:38 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-06-17 3:39 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-06-17 3:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101029
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill <jason@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ff4deb4b1d0c5947669ddc76fde4db83e28009d8
commit r12-1548-gff4deb4b1d0c5947669ddc76fde4db83e28009d8
Author: Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
Date: Wed Jun 16 17:42:15 2021 -0400
c++: Tweak PR101029 fix
The case of an initializer with side effects for a zero-length array seems
extremely unlikely, but we should still return the right type in that case.
PR c++/101029
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
* init.c (build_vec_init): Preserve the type of base.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/101029] [10/11/12 regression] unexpected error: non-constant condition for static assertion in gcc 10/11, but not 9 (clang also fine)
2021-06-11 12:04 [Bug c++/101029] New: unexpected error: non-constant condition for static assertion in gcc 10/11, but not 9 (clang also fine) jim.w.walker at gmail dot com
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2021-06-17 3:38 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-06-17 3:39 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-06-17 3:39 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-07-06 6:49 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-06-17 3:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101029
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Jason Merrill
<jason@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:da25516718cb150cc938f5947650c9ab486505c6
commit r11-8586-gda25516718cb150cc938f5947650c9ab486505c6
Author: Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
Date: Wed Jun 16 17:42:15 2021 -0400
c++: Tweak PR101029 fix
The case of an initializer with side effects for a zero-length array seems
extremely unlikely, but we should still return the right type in that case.
PR c++/101029
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
* init.c (build_vec_init): Preserve the type of base.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/101029] [10/11/12 regression] unexpected error: non-constant condition for static assertion in gcc 10/11, but not 9 (clang also fine)
2021-06-11 12:04 [Bug c++/101029] New: unexpected error: non-constant condition for static assertion in gcc 10/11, but not 9 (clang also fine) jim.w.walker at gmail dot com
` (12 preceding siblings ...)
2021-06-17 3:39 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-06-17 3:39 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-07-06 6:49 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-06-17 3:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101029
--- Comment #12 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jason Merrill
<jason@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4b98b55e0e8b4051f4e3b0afc76b506b01f0889f
commit r10-9926-g4b98b55e0e8b4051f4e3b0afc76b506b01f0889f
Author: Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
Date: Fri Jun 11 16:55:30 2021 -0400
c++: constexpr and array[0] [PR101029]
build_vec_init_elt exits early if we're initializing a zero-element array,
so build_vec_init needs to do the same to avoid trying to instantiate
things
after we've already started throwing important bits away.
PR c++/101029
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
* init.c (build_vec_init): Shortcut [0] case.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/ext/array4.C: New test.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/101029] [10/11/12 regression] unexpected error: non-constant condition for static assertion in gcc 10/11, but not 9 (clang also fine)
2021-06-11 12:04 [Bug c++/101029] New: unexpected error: non-constant condition for static assertion in gcc 10/11, but not 9 (clang also fine) jim.w.walker at gmail dot com
` (13 preceding siblings ...)
2021-06-17 3:39 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-07-06 6:49 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
14 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-07-06 6:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101029
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|--- |10.4
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Known to work| |10.3.1, 11.1.1, 12.0
Known to fail| |10.3.0, 11.1.0
Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fixed I guess.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread