A broken diagnostic is issued for the following invalid code snippet
since GCC 4.0.0:

================================
void foo(char **p, char **q)
{
  (p - q)();
}
================================

With GCC 4.0.x we got 

bug.c: In function 'foo':
bug.c:3: error: called object '#'exact_div_expr' not supported by
pp_c_expression#' is not a function

which is already bad enough. But since GCC 4.1.0 it's even worse:

#'exact_div_expr' not supported by pp_c_expression#'bug.c: In function 'foo':
bug.c:3: error: called object  is not a function

Not only the exact_div_expr case should be fixed, but also the output
order when we hit something unsupported. And, yes, there are more cases
of unsupported expressions. How about the following?

================================
void foo(char *p, char *q)
{
  (p < q ? p : q)();
}
================================

#'min_expr' not supported by pp_c_expression#'bug.c: In function 'foo':
bug.c:3: error: called object  is not a function

================================
void foo(double x, double y)
{
  (x/y)();
}
================================

#'rdiv_expr' not supported by pp_c_expression#'bug.c: In function 'foo':
bug.c:3: error: called object  is not a function

================================
void foo(unsigned i, int j)
{
  (i << j | i >> (32 - j))();
  (i >> j | i << (32 - j))();
}
================================

#'lrotate_expr' not supported by pp_c_expression#'bug.c: In function 'foo':
bug.c:3: error: called object  is not a function
#'rrotate_expr' not supported by pp_c_expression#'bug.c:4: error: called object
 is not a function


-- 
           Summary: [4.1/4.2/4.3/4.4 regression] Completely broken
                    diagnostics
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.4.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Keywords: diagnostic, monitored
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: c
        AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
        ReportedBy: reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35441

Reply via email to