Jan de M. wrote:
On Mar 4, 9:22 pm, Benjamin Smedberg <[email protected]> wrote:
This is a known difference between x86-64 and i686, if I remember correctly.
Also not a problem. I suspect you have a fully functional dehydra/treehydra.
--BDS
Thanks for your reply.
I tested Dehydra today and it works fine indeed. Treehydra is not
built though, I have only gcc_dehydra.so and no gcc_treehydra.so
After the "required types" message it gives another error:
************************************************************************
Dehydra didn't find required types needed to generate Treehydra
In file included from /home/jan/gcc-dehydra/gcc-4.3.3/gcc/tree-flow.h:
1187,
from gcc_cp_headers.h:24:
/home/jan/gcc-dehydra/gcc-4.3.3/gcc/tree-flow-inline.h: In function
‘void mark_call_clobbered(tree_node*, unsigned int)’:
/home/jan/gcc-dehydra/gcc-4.3.3/gcc/tree-flow-inline.h:853:33: error:
invalid conversion from ‘unsigned int’ to ‘escape_type’
/home/jan/gcc-dehydra/gcc-4.3.3/gcc/tree-flow-inline.h: In function
‘void clear_call_clobbered(tree_node*)’:
/home/jan/gcc-dehydra/gcc-4.3.3/gcc/tree-flow-inline.h:864:22: error:
invalid conversion from ‘int’ to ‘escape_type’
In file included from cp-tree-jsapi-workaround.h:17,
from gcc_cp_headers.h:27:
/home/jan/gcc-dehydra/gcc-4.3.3/gcc/cp/cp-tree.h: In function
‘tree_node* next_aggr_init_expr_arg(aggr_init_expr_arg_iterator*)’:
/home/jan/gcc-dehydra/gcc-4.3.3/gcc/cp/cp-tree.h:2535:157: warning:
comparison between ‘enum tree_code’ and ‘enum cplus_tree_code’
/home/jan/gcc-dehydra/gcc-4.3.3/gcc/cp/cp-tree.h:2535:443: warning:
comparison between ‘enum tree_code’ and ‘enum cplus_tree_code’
/home/jan/gcc-dehydra/gcc-4.3.3/gcc/cp/cp-tree.h:2535:703: warning:
comparison between ‘enum tree_code’ and ‘enum cplus_tree_code’
Dehydra didn't find required types needed to generate Treehydra
Due to the current limitations of the plugin API this error is always
printed once. If it's printed twice, then you are in trouble.
Sounds like g++ isn't able to parse the C headers for gcc 4.3.3(it was
mostly luck that 4.3.0 worked, I haven't tested 4.3.3). You have two
options, either fix the C++ incompatibility in the header(might be easy)
or use GCC 4.3.0.
GCC 4.4 should have an easier time with C++ compatibility and 4.5 will
actually support plugins, so this will get less painful over time.
Taras
_______________________________________________
dev-static-analysis mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-static-analysis
