Re: [r17-810 Regression] FAIL: g++.dg/reflect/define_static_array4.C -std=c++26 (test for excess errors) on Linux/x86_64

This should already be resolved by:
commit bd02a048e92a778c2d3fcc011b8a88e1ac6f8183
Author: Tomasz Kamiński <[email protected]>
Date:   Tue May 26 18:01:40 2026 +0200

    libstdc++: Revert making ref_view<R> statically sized.

    This patch reverts all changes except introduction of
    ranges::__static_size from r17-810-g7239744d25dadf.

Thanks,
Tomasz

On Wed, May 27, 2026 at 12:16 PM Haochen Jiang <[email protected]>
wrote:

> On Linux/x86_64,
>
> 7239744d25dadf39f431dfe38f3c03942acdb979 is the first bad commit
> commit 7239744d25dadf39f431dfe38f3c03942acdb979
> Author: Tomasz Kamiński <[email protected]>
> Date:   Fri Apr 24 05:26:13 2026 +0200
>
>     libstdc++: Make ref_view<R> statically sized if R has static size
>
> caused
>
> FAIL: g++.dg/reflect/define_static_array4.C  -std=c++26 (test for excess
> errors)
>
> with GCC configured with
>
> ../../gcc/configure
> --prefix=/export/users3/haochenj/src/gcc-bisect/master/master/r17-810/usr
> --enable-clocale=gnu --with-system-zlib --with-demangler-in-ld
> --with-fpmath=sse --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran --enable-cet
> --without-isl --enable-libmpx x86_64-linux --disable-bootstrap
>
> To reproduce:
>
> $ cd {build_dir}/gcc && make check
> RUNTESTFLAGS="dg.exp=g++.dg/reflect/define_static_array4.C
> --target_board='unix{-m32}'"
> $ cd {build_dir}/gcc && make check
> RUNTESTFLAGS="dg.exp=g++.dg/reflect/define_static_array4.C
> --target_board='unix{-m32\ -march=cascadelake}'"
> $ cd {build_dir}/gcc && make check
> RUNTESTFLAGS="dg.exp=g++.dg/reflect/define_static_array4.C
> --target_board='unix{-m64}'"
> $ cd {build_dir}/gcc && make check
> RUNTESTFLAGS="dg.exp=g++.dg/reflect/define_static_array4.C
> --target_board='unix{-m64\ -march=cascadelake}'"
>
> (Please directly reply to this email for question about this report.)
> (If you met problems with cascadelake related, disabling AVX512F in
> command line might save that.)
> (However, please make sure that there is no potential problems with
> AVX512.)
>
>