Mark Mitchell writes: > Andrew Haley wrote: > > Geoffrey Keating writes: > > > Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > > > RC2 is available here: > > > > > > > > ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/prerelease-4.0.0-20050417/ > > > > > > > > As before, I'd very much appreciate it if people would test these bits > > > > on primary and secondary platforms, post test results with the > > > > contrib/test_summary script, and send me a message saying whether or > > > > not there are any regressions, together with a pointer to the results. > > > > > > Bad news, I'm afraid. > > > > It's a bug in dbxout. A field is marked as DECL_IGNORED_P, but > > dbxout_type_fields() still tries to access it. > > > > 2005-04-19 Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > * dbxout.c (dbxout_type_fields): Check DECL_IGNORED_P before > > looking at a field's bitpos. > > The C++ front-end (and probably the C front-end) strips zero-width (and > possibly unnamed) bitfields after class layout. This can be justified > in that those bitfields only affect layout; one doesn't need the > middle-end to copy them around, etc. So, you could probably fix this in > the Java front end in the same way.
Do you mean running through the struct removing such fields from the list? OK, I can do that. > From your patch, it looks like you're letting the back end see > these bitfields, and also that their DECL_SIZE is not set > correctly, which is dangerous in general. I see. Well, I have just made the change to dbxout.c anyway, and it is correct, but I'll make the FE cahnge anyway, > So, I would suggest fixing this in the Java front end. I'll see if I can find the C++ front end code you refer to and use it as a reference. Andrew.
