Dominique Dhumieres wrote:
> I have reported the error in pr445#15 and explained in comment #6:
PR448, to be precise. I see Joseph is back from his AFK and has added
comment#16.
> /opt/gcc/gcc-4.5-work/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/c99-stdint-1.c: In function
> 'test_ptr': /opt/gcc/gcc-4.5-work/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/c99-stdint-1.c:186:
> error: initialization from incompatible pointer type
> /opt/gcc/gcc-4.5-work/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/c99-stdint-1.c:186: error:
> initialization from incompatible pointer type
So, for example, these two errors come from:
186 CHECK_SIGNED_LIMITS_2(intptr_t, INTPTR_MIN, INTPTR_MAX, -0x7fff,
0x7fff);
The possibilities are either that the limits are incorrect (too big or too
large numerically, or you might find that the limits are right and the
intptr_t type is defined incorrectly to hold them) - do you have 32- or 64-bit
pointers? - or, and this is what I found most commonly in the other ports that
I've looked at, that there is an incorrect suffix on the integer constant -
e.g. 'll' for something that is assigned to a variable that is actually long,
a 'u' suffix on a limit for a signed type or a missing 'u' suffix on a signed
type.
There are only a few possibilities to consider and if you look at all the
definitions for the types and limits that appear on the line where the error
is reported you should see one of these inconsistencies. I found it well
worthwhile rerunning the testcase manually, adding --save-temps to get a look
at the actual expanded macros as the compiler sees them in-situ.
cheers,
DaveK
