From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 614183858430; Wed, 1 Feb 2023 19:07:18 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 614183858430 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1675278438; bh=O3TZGf49neKT9KmC59bmfHueaaMncDoGGxKhIYKMQUI=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=ZEylMrGpCBDf2RSNTQ+6hAOhyo8vzWFh3BLrvC5ieu6nUdgEmBKaantGnOf7iwGbD 61LXLkqHHyvIJExumZLiCeu5UBY2ZASDtl1TCLhFtOkbLuGkRgPeMddU/Q6OWmzEGO Ym8J8gXrSrUerIlAAkj+c/UyrAtTCLIenoSTBjDE= From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/108099] [12/13 Regression] ICE with type alias with `signed __int128_t` Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2023 19:07:18 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: c++ X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.2.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 11.4 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D108099 --- Comment #15 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #14)>=20 > Those are all correct. They don't use the __int128_t typedef, only the > keyword. Then I wonder how someone got the reduced testcase from PR 108613 which used __int128_t. Did they have a -D__int128=3D__int128_t somewhere?=