http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53752
Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-06-25
08:49:30 UTC ---
Jason - is that what is expected? Or should we have rejected the array
before? I suppose a value of zero is unused (apart from for the GNU extension
of array[0]). But array[0] and array[ULONG_MAX] would mangle the same.
Patch that restores previous behavior:
Index: gcc/cp/mangle.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/cp/mangle.c (revision 188927)
+++ gcc/cp/mangle.c (working copy)
@@ -3121,6 +3121,9 @@ write_array_type (const tree type)
elements in the array, not the largest allowed index. */
double_int dmax
= double_int_add (tree_to_double_int (max), double_int_one);
+ /* Truncate the result - this will mangle [0, SIZE_INT_MAX]
+ number of elements as zero. */
+ dmax = double_int_zext (dmax, TYPE_PRECISION (TREE_TYPE (max)));
gcc_assert (double_int_fits_in_uhwi_p (dmax));
write_unsigned_number (dmax.low);
}
