[Bug c++/47734] New: no "comparisons like X<=Y<=Z do not have their mathematical meaning" warning in c++

2011-02-14 Thread sds at gnu dot org 
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47734

   Summary: no "comparisons like X<=Y<=Z do not have their
mathematical meaning" warning in c++
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.1.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: s...@gnu.org


gcc issues a warning
comparisons like X<=Y<=Z do not have their mathematical meaning
for code like
if (-2 < -1 < 0) {
 
}
but c++ does not.

[Bug c++/35708] New: jump to label enters catch block

2008-03-26 Thread sds at gnu dot org 
uname -a
SunOS neron 5.9 Generic_112233-08 sun4u sparc SUNW,Sun-Fire-480R
g++ --version
g++ (GCC) 4.2.1

the following program fails with the error
=== zot.cc =
int alloccount = 100;

struct object { int one_o; int allocstamp; };
struct gcv_object_t {
  int one_o;
  /* Conversion to object. */
  operator object () const;
  /* Conversion from object. */
  gcv_object_t (object obj);
  /* Conversion from fake_gcv_object. */
  gcv_object_t (struct fake_gcv_object obj);
  /* Uninitialized object. */
  gcv_object_t ();
};

  static inline int pgci_pointable (object obj) {
return obj.one_o;
  }
  static inline int pgci_pointable (gcv_object_t obj) {
return obj.one_o;
  }

gcv_object_t STACK[1];

int main (int argc, char *argv[]) {

  check_rehash_size: {
if ((pgci_pointable(STACK[0]) ==
pgci_pointableobject){one_o:(((int)(int)(((0 << 3) + 7UL)) << 0) +
((int)(int)(0) << 7)), allocstamp: alloccount}) {
 bad_rehash_size:
  goto check_rehash_size;
  }
   goto bad_rehash_size;
 }
}
=== zot.cc =
$ g++ -c zot.cc
zot.cc: In function 'int main(int, char**)':
zot.cc:30: error: jump to label 'bad_rehash_size'
zot.cc:33: error:   from here
zot.cc:29: error:   enters catch block

I don't see any catch blocks here.
thanks.


-- 
   Summary: jump to label enters catch block
   Product: gcc
   Version: 4.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P3
 Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: sds at gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35708

[Bug c++/35708] jump to label enters catch block

2008-03-26 Thread sds at gnu dot org 


--- Comment #2 from sds at gnu dot org  2008-03-26 20:44 ---
so? the objects are created, used and discarded on the fly.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35708

[Bug c/19881] New: strange warning about alloca

2005-02-10 Thread sds at gnu dot org 
the following file
= foo.c 
#include 
#include 
#include 

extern void bar (char*, char*);

void foo (const char *name, const char *type)
{
  {
size_t name_len = strlen (name);
char *name_temp = (char *) alloca (name_len);
if (name_len > 0)
  memcpy (name_temp, name, name_len);
{
  char name_copy[name_len + 2];
  memcpy (name_copy, name_temp, name_len);
  name_copy[name_len] = '$';
  name_copy[name_len + 1] = '\0';
  {
size_t type_len = strlen (type);
char *type_temp = (char *) alloca (type_len);
if (type_len > 0)
  memcpy (type_temp, type, type_len);
{
  char type_copy[type_len + 2];
  memcpy (type_copy, type_temp, type_len);
  type_copy[type_len] = '$';
  type_copy[type_len + 1] = '\0';
  {
bar (name_copy, type_copy);
  }
}
  }
}
  }
}
= foo.c 
produces this warning:
$ gcc -c foo.c
foo.c: In function `foo':
foo.c:21: warning: alloca()ed storage released along with dynamically-sized auto
  objects
on this system: "gcc (GCC) 3.4.2 20041017 (Red Hat 3.4.2-6.fc3)"

-- 
   Summary: strange warning about alloca
   Product: gcc
   Version: 3.4.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: c
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: sds at gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19881

[Bug c/19881] strange warning about alloca

2005-02-10 Thread sds at gnu dot org 


-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 CC||bruno at clisp dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19881

[Bug middle-end/14236] dynamically-sized arrays break alloca()

2005-02-10 Thread sds at gnu dot org 

--- Additional Comments From sds at gnu dot org  2005-02-10 21:13 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Well, yes, it is documented, but that doesn't make it right (although I know
> people that will qualify documented bugs as features :-).  IMHO, it's still
> wrong, especially now that variable-length arrays are standard.  Sure, alloca 
> is
> non-standard, but it still doesn't feel right.

why is this not right?
I find this perfectly natural.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 CC||bruno at clisp dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14236

[Bug middle-end/14236] dynamically-sized arrays break alloca()

2005-02-14 Thread sds at gnu dot org 

--- Additional Comments From sds at gnu dot org  2005-02-14 17:47 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> - memory allocated with alloca() is released at the time the function that 
> calls
> alloca() returns

oh - I didn't know that.
I always thought that alloca()ted memory is released by the next "}".
(i.e., identical to dynamic arrays).
Thanks for the clarification.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14236