public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug c++/108138] New: g++ 9+ takes 7-10x longer compiling constexpr
@ 2022-12-16 0:14 peter at meraki dot com
2022-12-16 0:14 ` [Bug c++/108138] " peter at meraki dot com
` (13 more replies)
0 siblings, 14 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: peter at meraki dot com @ 2022-12-16 0:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108138
Bug ID: 108138
Summary: g++ 9+ takes 7-10x longer compiling constexpr
Product: gcc
Version: 11.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: peter at meraki dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 54107
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54107&action=edit
testcase
The attached testcase takes ~24s to compile on gcc 8.4.0 but takes ~172s with
gcc 11.1.0:
g++-8 -std=gnu++11 -Wall -Werror -ftime-report -c constexpr-testcase2.cc
Time variable usr sys wall
GGC
phase setup : 0.01 ( 0%) 0.00 ( 0%) 0.02 ( 0%)
1495 kB ( 32%)
phase parsing : 19.02 (100%) 5.05 (100%) 24.07 (100%)
3197 kB ( 68%)
|name lookup : 0.01 ( 0%) 0.01 ( 0%) 0.02 ( 0%)
102 kB ( 2%)
|overload resolution : 6.60 ( 35%) 1.61 ( 32%) 7.87 ( 33%)
474 kB ( 10%)
preprocessing : 0.01 ( 0%) 0.01 ( 0%) 0.00 ( 0%)
264 kB ( 6%)
parser (global) : 0.00 ( 0%) 0.00 ( 0%) 0.02 ( 0%)
576 kB ( 12%)
parser inl. func. body : 2.34 ( 12%) 0.72 ( 14%) 2.83 ( 12%)
2325 kB ( 49%)
constant expression evaluation : 16.67 ( 88%) 4.32 ( 86%) 21.22 ( 88%)
31 kB ( 1%)
TOTAL : 19.03 5.05 24.09
4709 kB
g++-11 -Wall -Werror -ftime-report -c constexpr-testcase2.cc
Time variable usr sys wall
GGC
phase setup : 0.00 ( 0%) 0.00 ( 0%) 0.01 ( 0%)
1553k ( 4%)
phase parsing : 165.22 (100%) 7.55 (100%) 172.78 (100%)
36M ( 96%)
|name lookup : 0.02 ( 0%) 0.00 ( 0%) 0.00 ( 0%)
102k ( 0%)
|overload resolution : 82.10 ( 50%) 4.00 ( 53%) 85.99 ( 50%)
17M ( 46%)
preprocessing : 0.01 ( 0%) 0.02 ( 0%) 0.01 ( 0%)
224k ( 1%)
parser (global) : 0.00 ( 0%) 0.00 ( 0%) 0.01 ( 0%)
579k ( 1%)
parser inl. func. body : 2.92 ( 2%) 0.12 ( 2%) 2.82 ( 2%)
5336k ( 14%)
constant expression evaluation : 162.29 ( 98%) 7.41 ( 98%) 169.94 ( 98%)
30M ( 80%)
TOTAL : 165.22 7.55 172.79
38M
The dramatic slowdown appears to have been introduced in gcc 9
The best wall time (of versions tested) was gcc 7.5 at ~15s
The worst wall time was gcc 10.3 at ~180s
The wordlist was trivially constructed from:
wget https://www.mit.edu/~ecprice/wordlist.10000
head -1000 wordlist.10000 | sed 's/\(.*\)/CHECK(\1)/' > wordlist.1000.hh
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/108138] g++ 9+ takes 7-10x longer compiling constexpr
2022-12-16 0:14 [Bug c++/108138] New: g++ 9+ takes 7-10x longer compiling constexpr peter at meraki dot com
@ 2022-12-16 0:14 ` peter at meraki dot com
2022-12-16 3:06 ` [Bug c++/108138] [10/11 Regression] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (12 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: peter at meraki dot com @ 2022-12-16 0:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108138
--- Comment #1 from Peter Hurley <peter at meraki dot com> ---
Created attachment 54108
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54108&action=edit
testcase header file
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/108138] [10/11 Regression] g++ 9+ takes 7-10x longer compiling constexpr
2022-12-16 0:14 [Bug c++/108138] New: g++ 9+ takes 7-10x longer compiling constexpr peter at meraki dot com
2022-12-16 0:14 ` [Bug c++/108138] " peter at meraki dot com
@ 2022-12-16 3:06 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-16 3:08 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (11 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-12-16 3:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108138
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords| |compile-time-hog
Target Milestone|--- |10.5
Known to work| |12.1.0
Summary|g++ 9+ takes 7-10x longer |[10/11 Regression] g++ 9+
|compiling constexpr |takes 7-10x longer
| |compiling constexpr
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Looks like it was fixed in GCC 12.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/108138] [10/11 Regression] g++ 9+ takes 7-10x longer compiling constexpr
2022-12-16 0:14 [Bug c++/108138] New: g++ 9+ takes 7-10x longer compiling constexpr peter at meraki dot com
2022-12-16 0:14 ` [Bug c++/108138] " peter at meraki dot com
2022-12-16 3:06 ` [Bug c++/108138] [10/11 Regression] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-12-16 3:08 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-16 3:12 ` [Bug c++/108138] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (10 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-12-16 3:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108138
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
GCC 12 looks faster than GCC 8 even:
Time variable usr sys wall
GGC
phase setup : 0.00 ( 0%) 0.01 ( 25%) 0.02 ( 7%)
1578k ( 19%)
phase parsing : 0.18 (100%) 0.03 ( 75%) 0.25 ( 93%)
6615k ( 81%)
|name lookup : 0.00 ( 0%) 0.00 ( 0%) 0.02 ( 7%)
102k ( 1%)
|overload resolution : 0.07 ( 39%) 0.01 ( 25%) 0.09 ( 33%)
2446k ( 30%)
preprocessing : 0.00 ( 0%) 0.01 ( 25%) 0.01 ( 4%)
224k ( 3%)
parser inl. func. body : 0.17 ( 94%) 0.02 ( 50%) 0.21 ( 78%)
5625k ( 69%)
constant expression evaluation : 0.01 ( 6%) 0.00 ( 0%) 0.03 ( 11%)
187k ( 2%)
TOTAL : 0.18 0.04 0.27
8204k
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/108138] g++ 9+ takes 7-10x longer compiling constexpr
2022-12-16 0:14 [Bug c++/108138] New: g++ 9+ takes 7-10x longer compiling constexpr peter at meraki dot com
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2022-12-16 3:08 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-12-16 3:12 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-16 8:18 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (9 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-12-16 3:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108138
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
See Also| |https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
| |a/show_bug.cgi?id=102780
Summary|[10/11 Regression] g++ 9+ |g++ 9+ takes 7-10x longer
|takes 7-10x longer |compiling constexpr
|compiling constexpr |
Target Milestone|10.5 |12.0
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I think it was fixed by the patch which fixed/improved PR 102780:
r12-4769-g9927ecbb42d5b
The reason why I am declaring this as fully fixed for GCC 12 is that GCC 12 is
so much faster than all other versions including 7.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/108138] g++ 9+ takes 7-10x longer compiling constexpr
2022-12-16 0:14 [Bug c++/108138] New: g++ 9+ takes 7-10x longer compiling constexpr peter at meraki dot com
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2022-12-16 3:12 ` [Bug c++/108138] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-12-16 8:18 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-16 9:40 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
` (8 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-12-16 8:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108138
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Patrick, is there anything that can be done on the GCC 10/11 branches for this
regression from GCC 8?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/108138] g++ 9+ takes 7-10x longer compiling constexpr
2022-12-16 0:14 [Bug c++/108138] New: g++ 9+ takes 7-10x longer compiling constexpr peter at meraki dot com
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2022-12-16 8:18 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-12-16 9:40 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-16 11:21 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-12-16 9:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108138
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Just for the record, since nobody seems to have said it yet, the slowdown is
independent of the -std option. GCC 8 is fast even with -std=gnu++17 (instead
of the default gnu++14) and GCC 11 is slow even with -std=gnu++14 (instead of
the default -std=gnu++17).
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/108138] g++ 9+ takes 7-10x longer compiling constexpr
2022-12-16 0:14 [Bug c++/108138] New: g++ 9+ takes 7-10x longer compiling constexpr peter at meraki dot com
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2022-12-16 9:40 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-12-16 11:21 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-16 12:18 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-12-16 11:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108138
Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The slowdown began with r9-942-ge079dced7a8383
CWG 1581: When are constexpr member functions defined?
* constexpr.c (instantiate_cx_fn_r, instantiate_constexpr_fns):
New.
(cxx_eval_outermost_constant_expr): Call instantiate_constexpr_fns.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/108138] g++ 9+ takes 7-10x longer compiling constexpr
2022-12-16 0:14 [Bug c++/108138] New: g++ 9+ takes 7-10x longer compiling constexpr peter at meraki dot com
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2022-12-16 11:21 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-12-16 12:18 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-16 12:22 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-12-16 12:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108138
Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last reconfirmed| |2022-12-16
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC| |marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/108138] g++ 9+ takes 7-10x longer compiling constexpr
2022-12-16 0:14 [Bug c++/108138] New: g++ 9+ takes 7-10x longer compiling constexpr peter at meraki dot com
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2022-12-16 12:18 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-12-16 12:22 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-16 14:36 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-12-16 12:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108138
--- Comment #8 from Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> I think it was fixed by the patch which fixed/improved PR 102780:
> r12-4769-g9927ecbb42d5b
I can confirm this!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/108138] g++ 9+ takes 7-10x longer compiling constexpr
2022-12-16 0:14 [Bug c++/108138] New: g++ 9+ takes 7-10x longer compiling constexpr peter at meraki dot com
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2022-12-16 12:22 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-12-16 14:36 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-16 21:11 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-12-16 14:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108138
Patrick Palka <ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #9 from Patrick Palka <ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I'll look into backporting the PR102780 fix
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/108138] g++ 9+ takes 7-10x longer compiling constexpr
2022-12-16 0:14 [Bug c++/108138] New: g++ 9+ takes 7-10x longer compiling constexpr peter at meraki dot com
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2022-12-16 14:36 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-12-16 21:11 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-16 21:14 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-12-16 21:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108138
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
<ppalka@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:71d2567a678b01a3a59064d22e0f9165be9e93c3
commit r11-10424-g71d2567a678b01a3a59064d22e0f9165be9e93c3
Author: Patrick Palka <ppalka@redhat.com>
Date: Thu Oct 28 10:05:14 2021 -0400
c++: quadratic constexpr behavior for left-assoc logical exprs [PR102780]
In the testcase below the two left fold expressions each expand into a
constant logical expression with 1024 terms, for which potential_const_expr
takes more than a minute to return true. This happens because p_c_e_1
performs trial evaluation of the first operand of a &&/|| in order to
determine whether to consider the potentiality of the second operand.
And because the expanded expression is left-associated, this trial
evaluation causes p_c_e_1 to be quadratic in the number of terms of the
expression.
This patch fixes this quadratic behavior by making p_c_e_1 preemptively
compute potentiality of the second operand of a &&/||, and perform trial
evaluation of the first operand only if the second operand isn't
potentially constant. We must be careful to avoid emitting bogus
diagnostics during the preemptive computation; to that end, we perform
this shortcut only when tf_error is cleared, and when tf_error is set we
now first check potentiality of the whole expression quietly and replay
the check noisily for diagnostics.
Apart from fixing the quadraticness for left-associated logical exprs,
this change also reduces compile time for the libstdc++ testcase
20_util/variant/87619.cc by about 15% even though our <variant> uses
right folds instead of left folds. Likewise for the testcase in the PR,
for which compile time is reduced by 30%. The reason for these speedups
is that p_c_e_1 no longer performs expensive trial evaluation of each term
of large constant logical expressions when determining their potentiality.
PR c++/102780
PR c++/108138
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
* constexpr.c (potential_constant_expression_1) <case
TRUTH_*_EXPR>:
When tf_error isn't set, preemptively check potentiality of the
second operand before performing trial evaluation of the first
operand.
(potential_constant_expression_1): When tf_error is set, first
check
potentiality quietly and return true if successful, otherwise
proceed noisily to give errors.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/cpp1z/fold13.C: New test.
(cherry picked from commit 9927ecbb42d5be48fa933adc26f8601fab5007ca)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/108138] g++ 9+ takes 7-10x longer compiling constexpr
2022-12-16 0:14 [Bug c++/108138] New: g++ 9+ takes 7-10x longer compiling constexpr peter at meraki dot com
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2022-12-16 21:11 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-12-16 21:14 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-16 21:48 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-17 18:56 ` peter at meraki dot com
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-12-16 21:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108138
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
<ppalka@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:16605ad9b1e1a6c5aab2c98b5b0f995285584f81
commit r10-11124-g16605ad9b1e1a6c5aab2c98b5b0f995285584f81
Author: Patrick Palka <ppalka@redhat.com>
Date: Thu Oct 28 10:05:14 2021 -0400
c++: quadratic constexpr behavior for left-assoc logical exprs [PR102780]
In the testcase below the two left fold expressions each expand into a
constant logical expression with 1024 terms, for which potential_const_expr
takes more than a minute to return true. This happens because p_c_e_1
performs trial evaluation of the first operand of a &&/|| in order to
determine whether to consider the potentiality of the second operand.
And because the expanded expression is left-associated, this trial
evaluation causes p_c_e_1 to be quadratic in the number of terms of the
expression.
This patch fixes this quadratic behavior by making p_c_e_1 preemptively
compute potentiality of the second operand of a &&/||, and perform trial
evaluation of the first operand only if the second operand isn't
potentially constant. We must be careful to avoid emitting bogus
diagnostics during the preemptive computation; to that end, we perform
this shortcut only when tf_error is cleared, and when tf_error is set we
now first check potentiality of the whole expression quietly and replay
the check noisily for diagnostics.
Apart from fixing the quadraticness for left-associated logical exprs,
this change also reduces compile time for the libstdc++ testcase
20_util/variant/87619.cc by about 15% even though our <variant> uses
right folds instead of left folds. Likewise for the testcase in the PR,
for which compile time is reduced by 30%. The reason for these speedups
is that p_c_e_1 no longer performs expensive trial evaluation of each term
of large constant logical expressions when determining their potentiality.
PR c++/102780
PR c++/108138
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
* constexpr.c (potential_constant_expression_1) <case
TRUTH_*_EXPR>:
When tf_error isn't set, preemptively check potentiality of the
second operand before performing trial evaluation of the first
operand.
(potential_constant_expression_1): When tf_error is set, first
check
potentiality quietly and return true if successful, otherwise
proceed noisily to give errors.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/cpp1z/fold13.C: New test.
(cherry picked from commit 9927ecbb42d5be48fa933adc26f8601fab5007ca)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/108138] g++ 9+ takes 7-10x longer compiling constexpr
2022-12-16 0:14 [Bug c++/108138] New: g++ 9+ takes 7-10x longer compiling constexpr peter at meraki dot com
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2022-12-16 21:14 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-12-16 21:48 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-17 18:56 ` peter at meraki dot com
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-12-16 21:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108138
Patrick Palka <ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|12.0 |10.5
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED
--- Comment #12 from Patrick Palka <ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fixed for GCC 10.5/11.4+
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/108138] g++ 9+ takes 7-10x longer compiling constexpr
2022-12-16 0:14 [Bug c++/108138] New: g++ 9+ takes 7-10x longer compiling constexpr peter at meraki dot com
` (12 preceding siblings ...)
2022-12-16 21:48 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-12-17 18:56 ` peter at meraki dot com
13 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: peter at meraki dot com @ 2022-12-17 18:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108138
--- Comment #13 from Peter Hurley <peter at meraki dot com> ---
Thanks everyone! We're really grateful for the rapid response and backports!
Happy holidays!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-12-17 18:56 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2022-12-16 0:14 [Bug c++/108138] New: g++ 9+ takes 7-10x longer compiling constexpr peter at meraki dot com
2022-12-16 0:14 ` [Bug c++/108138] " peter at meraki dot com
2022-12-16 3:06 ` [Bug c++/108138] [10/11 Regression] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-16 3:08 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-16 3:12 ` [Bug c++/108138] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-16 8:18 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-16 9:40 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-16 11:21 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-16 12:18 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-16 12:22 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-16 14:36 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-16 21:11 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-16 21:14 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-16 21:48 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-17 18:56 ` peter at meraki dot com
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).