* [Bug c++/65186] internal compiler error: in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:11738
2015-02-24 8:07 [Bug c++/65186] New: internal compiler error: in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:11738 shum at canndrew dot org
@ 2015-02-24 9:11 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-02-24 12:18 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (11 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-02-24 9:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65186
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |dodji at gcc dot gnu.org,
| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
| |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
ICEs all the way back from r181118 that added support for template aliases.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/65186] internal compiler error: in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:11738
2015-02-24 8:07 [Bug c++/65186] New: internal compiler error: in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:11738 shum at canndrew dot org
2015-02-24 9:11 ` [Bug c++/65186] " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2015-02-24 12:18 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-04-17 10:38 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
` (10 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-02-24 12:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65186
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords| |ice-on-valid-code
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2015-02-24
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Thus confirmed.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/65186] internal compiler error: in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:11738
2015-02-24 8:07 [Bug c++/65186] New: internal compiler error: in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:11738 shum at canndrew dot org
2015-02-24 9:11 ` [Bug c++/65186] " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-02-24 12:18 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2015-04-17 10:38 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-04-17 10:40 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
` (9 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-04-17 10:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65186
Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Known to fail| |4.8.3, 4.9.2, 5.0, 6.0
Severity|minor |normal
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
This seems to hit the same ICE, without template aliases:
template <typename C, C> struct integral_constant {};
template <typename T, template <typename U, U> class> struct Sort;
template <template <typename U, U> class Comparator>
struct Sort<int, Comparator>
{
template <int I> struct less_than:
integral_constant<bool, Comparator<int, I>::value> {};
};
int main() {}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/65186] internal compiler error: in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:11738
2015-02-24 8:07 [Bug c++/65186] New: internal compiler error: in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:11738 shum at canndrew dot org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2015-04-17 10:38 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2015-04-17 10:40 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-07-08 10:33 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
` (8 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-04-17 10:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65186
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
In fact comment 3 doesn't even need C++11, it's valid C++03.
It came from http://stackoverflow.com/a/29696258/981959
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/65186] internal compiler error: in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:11738
2015-02-24 8:07 [Bug c++/65186] New: internal compiler error: in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:11738 shum at canndrew dot org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2015-04-17 10:40 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2015-07-08 10:33 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
2015-07-08 13:19 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: paolo.carlini at oracle dot com @ 2015-07-08 10:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65186
Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> ---
Dup of c++/30044?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/65186] internal compiler error: in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:11738
2015-02-24 8:07 [Bug c++/65186] New: internal compiler error: in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:11738 shum at canndrew dot org
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2015-07-08 10:33 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
@ 2015-07-08 13:19 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-07-11 13:50 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-07-08 13:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65186
--- Comment #6 from Patrick Palka <ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #5)
> Dup of c++/30044?
I don't think it's a duplicate but they do seem related. My patch for
c++/30044 does not fix this ICE.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/65186] internal compiler error: in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:11738
2015-02-24 8:07 [Bug c++/65186] New: internal compiler error: in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:11738 shum at canndrew dot org
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2015-07-08 13:19 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2015-07-11 13:50 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-07-11 17:47 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
` (5 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-07-11 13:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65186
Patrick Palka <ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8 from Patrick Palka <ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Here's a slightly simpler test case:
template <typename T, template <typename U, U> class> struct Sort;
template <template <typename U, U> class Comparator>
struct Sort<int, Comparator>
{
template <int I>
struct less_than
{
Comparator<int, I> a;
};
};
I'll try to fix this.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/65186] internal compiler error: in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:11738
2015-02-24 8:07 [Bug c++/65186] New: internal compiler error: in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:11738 shum at canndrew dot org
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2015-07-11 13:50 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2015-07-11 17:47 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
2015-07-11 22:10 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: paolo.carlini at oracle dot com @ 2015-07-11 17:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65186
--- Comment #9 from Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> ---
Thanks Patrick!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/65186] internal compiler error: in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:11738
2015-02-24 8:07 [Bug c++/65186] New: internal compiler error: in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:11738 shum at canndrew dot org
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2015-07-11 17:47 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
@ 2015-07-11 22:10 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-07-12 8:47 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
` (3 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-07-11 22:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65186
--- Comment #10 from Patrick Palka <ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
When I said that this PR is not a dup of c++/30044 I sadly failed to look at
#c1 and instead only looked at #c3. The test case in #c1 does appear to
effectively be a dup of c++/30044, and with the fix for that PR now in trunk
this test case no longer ICEs, but now it fails with a compile error:
65186.cc:10:3: error: ‘C<x, x, x>’ is not a valid type for a template non-type
parameter
C<x, x, x>>
^
This seems to be a bogus error because after instantiation C<x, x, x> will
resolve to int which is a valid type for the template parameter. The fix for
this is simple.
The test cases in #c3 and in #c8 however exposes an entirely different bug than
the test case in #c1 (even though the ICE is the same). I wonder what the
standard procedure here is. Should this PR be split into two?
>From gcc-bugs-return-492056-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Sat Jul 11 22:59:29 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-492056-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 129951 invoked by alias); 11 Jul 2015 22:59:28 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 129933 invoked by uid 48); 11 Jul 2015 22:59:25 -0000
From: "bin.x.fan at oracle dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug libstdc++/66842] New: libatomic uses multiple locks for locked atomics
Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2015 22:59:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: new
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: libstdc++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.2
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: bin.x.fan at oracle dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_id short_desc product version bug_status bug_severity priority component assigned_to reporter target_milestone
Message-ID: <bug-66842-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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
X-SW-Source: 2015-07/txt/msg00946.txt.bz2
Content-length: 2644
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66842
Bug ID: 66842
Summary: libatomic uses multiple locks for locked atomics
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: bin.x.fan at oracle dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Hi GCC folks,
I'm opening this bug to report an issue that may or may not be a real bug. I
notice that GCC libatomic uses multiple locks for a locked atomic object whose
size is greater than 64 bytes. The granularity seems to be 64 because for every
64 bytes added to the size, one more lock is added.
It seems that this is to protect overlapping locked atomic object. If locked
atomic objects never overlap, then a more efficient way to do locked atomic
operations would be each object being protected by just one lock that is hashed
from its address.
Accessing a member of an atomic struct object is undefined behavior in C11
standard. So, does GCC support it as an extension or using multiple locks is
unnecessary therefore it’s a performance bug?
Here is my code to illustrate the issue. I interpose pthread_mutex_lock to
count how many times it is called. My GCC version is 4.9.2, and its target is
x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. The libatomic.so I use comes with the GCC 4.9.2
installation.
-bash-4.2$ cat libmythread.c
#define _GNU_SOURCE
#include <pthread.h>
#include <dlfcn.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <assert.h>
static int counter = 0;
int pthread_mutex_lock (pthread_mutex_t *mutex)
{
static int (*real_pthread_mutex_lock)(pthread_mutex_t *) = NULL;
if (real_pthread_mutex_lock == NULL) {
real_pthread_mutex_lock = dlsym (RTLD_NEXT, "pthread_mutex_lock");
}
assert (real_pthread_mutex_lock);
counter++;
return real_pthread_mutex_lock (mutex);
}
void display_nlocks ()
{
printf ("pthread_mutex_lock is called %d times\n", counter);
return;
}
-bash-4.2$ cat c11_locked_atomics.c
#include <stdatomic.h>
#ifndef SIZE
#define SIZE 1024
#endif
typedef struct {
char a[SIZE];
} lock_obj_t;
extern void display_nlocks ();
int main()
{
lock_obj_t v2 = {0};
_Atomic lock_obj_t v1 = ATOMIC_VAR_INIT(v2);
v2 = atomic_load (&v1);
display_nlocks ();
return 0;
}
-bash-4.2$ gcc -shared -ldl -fPIC libmythread.c -o libmythread.so
-bash-4.2$ gcc -latomic c11_locked_atomics.c -DSIZE=2048 -L./ -Wl,-rpath=./
-lmythread
-bash-4.2$ LD_PRELOAD=./libmythread.so a.out
pthread_mutex_lock is called 32 times
>From gcc-bugs-return-492057-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Sun Jul 12 02:29:58 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-492057-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 119856 invoked by alias); 12 Jul 2015 02:29:54 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 117760 invoked by uid 48); 12 Jul 2015 02:29:45 -0000
From: "fvvnaqnd at grr dot la" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/66843] New: g++ outputting nonsense errors, won't compile operational program
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2015 02:29:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: new
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 5.1.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: fvvnaqnd at grr dot la
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_id short_desc product version bug_status bug_severity priority component assigned_to reporter target_milestone
Message-ID: <bug-66843-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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
X-SW-Source: 2015-07/txt/msg00947.txt.bz2
Content-length: 1432
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66843
Bug ID: 66843
Summary: g++ outputting nonsense errors, won't compile
operational program
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: fvvnaqnd at grr dot la
Target Milestone: ---
I'm trying to compile this valid c++ code, as follows:
int main(int argc, char** argv) {
dildo
#define char int
int *ptr = 0;
return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}
=
while(1)
break;
/* https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.en.html */
int i = 1 / 0;
goto dildo;
However, when trying to compile this with g++, the compiler spits out nonsense,
unintelligible errors:
shit.cpp: In function ‘int main(int, char**)’:
shit.cpp:2:5: error: ‘dildo’ was not declared in this scope
dildo
^
shit.cpp:5:12: error: ‘EXIT_SUCCESS’ was not declared in this scope
return EXIT_SUCCESS;
^
shit.cpp: At global scope:
shit.cpp:7:1: error: expected unqualified-id before ‘=’ token
=
^
shit.cpp:11:11: warning: division by zero [-Wdiv-by-zero]
int i = 1 / 0;
^
shit.cpp:12:1: error: expected unqualified-id before ‘goto’
goto dildo;
^
Please Respond
>From gcc-bugs-return-492058-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Sun Jul 12 04:51:16 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-492058-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 35368 invoked by alias); 12 Jul 2015 04:51:14 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 35345 invoked by uid 48); 12 Jul 2015 04:51:07 -0000
From: "Casey at Carter dot net" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/66844] New: [c++-concepts] Requires-expression parameter with void type
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2015 04:51:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: new
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 6.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: Casey at Carter dot net
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_id short_desc product version bug_status bug_severity priority component assigned_to reporter target_milestone
Message-ID: <bug-66844-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2015-07/txt/msg00948.txt.bz2
Content-length: 768
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idf844
Bug ID: 66844
Summary: [c++-concepts] Requires-expression parameter with void
type
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Casey at Carter dot net
Target Milestone: ---
This ill-formed program compiles successfully:
template <class T, class U>
concept bool Same = __is_same_as(T, U);
template <class T>
concept bool C requires (T t) {
requires Same<decltype(t),void>;
};
template <C>
constexpr bool is_c() { return true; }
static_assert(is_c<void>(), "");
int main() {}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/65186] internal compiler error: in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:11738
2015-02-24 8:07 [Bug c++/65186] New: internal compiler error: in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:11738 shum at canndrew dot org
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2015-07-11 22:10 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2015-07-12 8:47 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
2015-07-12 22:30 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: paolo.carlini at oracle dot com @ 2015-07-12 8:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65186
--- Comment #11 from Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> ---
Hi Patrick. Opening a new bug certainly is OK, in particular in this case where
we failed to just simplify the testcase originally submitted. Thus, when your
patch goes in, just resolve this one as fixed and open a new one with the best
testcase (#3, #8, or something else) for it. Thanks again!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/65186] internal compiler error: in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:11738
2015-02-24 8:07 [Bug c++/65186] New: internal compiler error: in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:11738 shum at canndrew dot org
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2015-07-12 8:47 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
@ 2015-07-12 22:30 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-07-13 20:36 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-07-14 9:10 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-07-12 22:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65186
--- Comment #12 from Patrick Palka <ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #11)
> Hi Patrick. Opening a new bug certainly is OK, in particular in this case
> where we failed to just simplify the testcase originally submitted. Thus,
> when your patch goes in, just resolve this one as fixed and open a new one
> with the best testcase (#3, #8, or something else) for it. Thanks again!
Thanks for your guidance. I opened up PR66850 to track the issue in c3 and c8
separately.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/65186] internal compiler error: in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:11738
2015-02-24 8:07 [Bug c++/65186] New: internal compiler error: in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:11738 shum at canndrew dot org
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2015-07-12 22:30 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2015-07-13 20:36 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-07-14 9:10 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-07-13 20:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65186
--- Comment #13 from Patrick Palka <ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Mon Jul 13 20:35:53 2015
New Revision: 225749
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=225749&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix PR c++/65186
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
PR c++/65186
* pt.c (invalid_nontype_parm_type_p): Accept a bound template
template parm type under C++11 and later.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
PR c++/65186
* g++.dg/template/pr65186.C: New test.
Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/pr65186.C
Modified:
trunk/gcc/cp/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/cp/pt.c
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/65186] internal compiler error: in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:11738
2015-02-24 8:07 [Bug c++/65186] New: internal compiler error: in tsubst, at cp/pt.c:11738 shum at canndrew dot org
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2015-07-13 20:36 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2015-07-14 9:10 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
12 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: paolo.carlini at oracle dot com @ 2015-07-14 9:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65186
Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
--- Comment #14 from Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> ---
Fixed.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread