[Bug c++/18384] [3.3/3.4/4.0 Regression] ICE on zero-length array with empty initializer...
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-25 06:39 --- Jakub, any plans to commit your patch to mainline and 3.3? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18384
[Bug c++/18384] [3.3/3.4/4.0 Regression] ICE on zero-length array with empty initializer...
--- Additional Comments From jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-25 06:49 --- The trunk version of the patch works (I have it in my local tree for ages), it hasn't been applied because of http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-12/msg01976.html but as seen in the thread after that there were issues with changing that. So I think it would be best to apply http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-12/msg01962.html (well, the actual patch I have is a tiny bit different) for at least 4.0 branch and deal with the sign extension of sizetype for 4.1. As for 3.3, I haven't had yet time to write the patch, so if there are any volunteers to write/regtest that, it would be appreciated. -- What|Removed |Added CC||rth at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18384
[Bug c++/18384] [3.3/3.4/4.0 Regression] ICE on zero-length array with empty initializer...
--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-02-07 10:37 --- Jakub, it looks like you applied the patch only to 3.4. Can you apply it to mainline and 3.3 too so that we can close this regression? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18384
[Bug c++/18384] [3.3/3.4/4.0 Regression] ICE on zero-length array with empty initializer...
--- Additional Comments From gdr at integrable-solutions dot net 2004-12-29 18:54 --- Subject: Re: [3.3/3.4/4.0 Regression] ICE on zero-length array with empty initializer... mark at codesourcery dot com [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | As for designated_index, this differs between 3.3 and 3.4+ it seems. | With GCC 3.3, reshape_init_array can see arbitrary trees in TREE_PURPOSE (), | checking of these happens afterwards, not before reshape_init. So I think we | certainly want a host_integerp (, 1) there, that will ensure it is an | INTEGER_CST and not negative. That is OK for 3.3.x -- Gaby -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18384
[Bug c++/18384] [3.3/3.4/4.0 Regression] ICE on zero-length array with empty initializer...
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-28 20:58 --- Subject: Bug 18384 CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc Module name:gcc Branch: gcc-3_4-branch Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-12-28 20:57:56 Modified files: gcc/cp : ChangeLog gcc/testsuite : ChangeLog gcc/cp : decl.c Added files: gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/init: array18.C Log message: PR c++/18384, c++/18327 * decl.c (reshape_init_array): Use UHWI type for max_index_cst and index. Convert max_index to size_type_node if it isn't host_integerp (, 1). * g++.dg/init/array18.C: New test. Patches: http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/cp/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcconly_with_tag=gcc-3_4-branchr1=1.3892.2.188r2=1.3892.2.189 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcconly_with_tag=gcc-3_4-branchr1=1.3389.2.337r2=1.3389.2.338 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/cp/decl.c.diff?cvsroot=gcconly_with_tag=gcc-3_4-branchr1=1.1174.2.28r2=1.1174.2.29 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/init/array18.C.diff?cvsroot=gcconly_with_tag=gcc-3_4-branchr1=NONEr2=1.1.2.1 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18384
[Bug c++/18384] [3.3/3.4/4.0 Regression] ICE on zero-length array with empty initializer...
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-27 15:47 --- Jakub posted a patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-12/msg01962.html. -- What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at redhat dot com Keywords|ice-on-invalid-code |ice-on-valid-code, patch http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18384
[Bug c++/18384] [3.3/3.4/4.0 Regression] ICE on zero-length array with empty initializer...
--- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-27 17:18 --- This patch is OK in pricinple. However, I don't think the designated_index change (to check for sizetype) is necessary. And, I think that the max_index should always be sizetype (and thus the check is unncessary). Jakub, would you please retry with a simplified version of your patch? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18384
[Bug c++/18384] [3.3/3.4/4.0 Regression] ICE on zero-length array with empty initializer...
--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2004-12-27 21:57 --- Jakub, many thanks for cleaning this up for me!! Just one comment: in your latest patch, the second error message is capitalized and shouldn't, plus it uses a double negation (not a non-negative number) which could be probably simplified into a negative number. -- What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|giovannibajo at libero dot |jakub at redhat dot com |it | http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18384
[Bug c++/18384] [3.3/3.4/4.0 Regression] ICE on zero-length array with empty initializer...
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-15 13:36 --- *** Bug 19006 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- What|Removed |Added CC||debian-gcc at lists dot ||debian dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18384
[Bug c++/18384] [3.3/3.4/4.0 Regression] ICE on zero-length array with empty initializer...
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-10 13:27 --- *** Bug 18922 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- What|Removed |Added CC||a dot kral at sh dot cvut ||dot cz http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18384
[Bug c++/18384] [3.3/3.4/4.0 Regression] ICE on zero-length array with empty initializer...
--- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-23 01:17 --- I think that the idea behavior here would be to match GNU C. If we reject this code in C, then we should certainly do so in C++ as well. If we accept it in C, then it would be nice to accept it in C++. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18384
[Bug c++/18384] [3.3/3.4/4.0 Regression] ICE on zero-length array with empty initializer...
--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2004-11-21 22:52 --- It looks like the testcase in this bug (and the related bugs and duplicates) is invalid. But I am not sure if it used to be accepted thanks to a GCC extension we want to prefer. Can someone elaborate on this? This affects the kind of fix we want to do, at least on mainline: if we catch the error early on, there is no need to add sanity checks in reshape_init, and the ICE will disappear. For the branches, of course, I'll prepare a minimum fix which will work around the ICE. -- What|Removed |Added CC||mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Keywords|ice-on-valid-code |ice-on-invalid-code http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18384
[Bug c++/18384] [3.3/3.4/4.0 Regression] ICE on zero-length array with empty initializer...
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-20 18:33 --- *** Bug 18581 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- What|Removed |Added CC||bagnara at cs dot unipr dot ||it http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18384
[Bug c++/18384] [3.3/3.4/4.0 Regression] ICE on zero-length array with empty initializer...
--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2004-11-18 09:00 --- OK, I'll take care of this since I caused it. -- What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|mark at codesourcery dot com|giovannibajo at libero dot ||it http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18384
[Bug c++/18384] [3.3/3.4/4.0 Regression] ICE on zero-length array with empty initializer...
--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2004-11-18 01:44 --- Mark, I guess this is the same problem of PR 18327. Will your fix take care of both, or should I look into PR 18327? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18384
[Bug c++/18384] [3.3/3.4/4.0 Regression] ICE on zero-length array with empty initializer...
--- Additional Comments From mark at codesourcery dot com 2004-11-18 07:59 --- Subject: Re: [3.3/3.4/4.0 Regression] ICE on zero-length array with empty initializer... giovannibajo at libero dot it wrote: --- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2004-11-18 01:44 --- Mark, I guess this is the same problem of PR 18327. Will your fix take care of both, or should I look into PR 18327? I haven't fixed either bug yet, so go for it! -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18384
[Bug c++/18384] [3.3/3.4/4.0 Regression] ICE on zero-length array with empty initializer...
-- What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |mark at codesourcery dot com |dot org | Status|NEW |ASSIGNED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18384
[Bug c++/18384] [3.3/3.4/4.0 Regression] ICE on zero-length array with empty initializer...
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-08 22:12 --- : Search converges between 2004-09-21-004002-3.4 (#77) and 2004-09-22-004001-3.4 (#78). : Search converges between 2004-09-20-161001-trunk (#551) and 2004-09-21-094824-trunk (#552). : Search converges between 2004-09-20-064502-3.3 (#296) and 2004-09-27-064501-3.3 (#297). Looks like another fall out from 2004-09-20 Giovanni Bajo [EMAIL PROTECTED] PR c++/14179 * decl.c (reshape_init): Extract array handling into... (reshape_init_array): New function. Use integers instead of trees for indices. Handle out-of-range designated initializers. Related to PR 18327 which is the first fall out. -- What|Removed |Added CC||giovannibajo at gcc dot gnu ||dot org, gdr at gcc dot gnu ||dot org, pinskia at gcc dot ||gnu dot org OtherBugsDependingO||18327 nThis|| Severity|normal |critical Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed||1 Keywords||ice-on-valid-code Known to fail||4.0.0 3.4.3 Known to work|3.3.3 3.4.2 2.95.3 |3.3 3.4.0 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2004-11-08 22:12:34 date|| Summary|ICE on zero-length array|[3.3/3.4/4.0 Regression] ICE |with empty initializer... |on zero-length array with ||empty initializer... Target Milestone|--- |3.4.4 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18384
