[Bug c++/15269] __attribute__((deprecated)) broken with inline, ignored with pure virtual, misreported after definition

2007-09-25 Thread eddy at opera dot com 


--- Comment #9 from eddy at opera dot com  2007-09-25 15:54 ---
Subject: Re:  __attribute__((deprecated)) broken with inline, ignored with pure
virtual, misreported after definition

> Virtual problem fixed for 4.3.0.

Yay !
Thank you :-)

Eddy.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15269

[Bug middle-end/8743] receiving result from __builtin_return_address() beyond stack top causes segfault

2005-09-08 Thread eddy at opera dot com 

--- Additional Comments From eddy at opera dot com  2005-09-08 07:54 ---
Subject: Re:  receiving result from __builtin_return_address() beyond stack top 
causes segfault

Yes, that's one of the work-arounds I considered: but has an
inconvenient problem - when shared libraries are loading, _start (the
function that calls main) hasn't yet been entered and main hasn't yet
recorded its address.  This means we have to not record the call-stack
when our global variable recording main's caller's address is as yet
unset.  Indeed, using ccmalloc got me a segfault before main was
entered in exactly this way, since it doesn't (or didn't, back when I
reported this bug - it's about time I had another look at ccmalloc) do
the work-around just described.

Eddy.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8743

[Bug middle-end/8743] receiving result from __builtin_return_address() beyond stack top causes segfault

2005-08-25 Thread eddy at opera dot com 

--- Additional Comments From eddy at opera dot com  2005-08-25 11:19 ---
Subject: Re:  receiving result from __builtin_return_address() beyond stack top 
causes segfault

> This is just a doc problem really.

If it is "just a doc problem" then the doc needs to change to say:

   __builtin_return_address(0) returns the address to which the
   current function will return; __builtin_return_address(1+n) may
   crash but if you're lucky it'll give the address to which the
   function indicated by __builtin_return_address(n) will return.
   This function is only provided for debug purposes.

but I'm deeply skeptical.  The function should either *not* take a
parameter (how far up the stack to look) or *not* crash when that
parameter is supplied or have some predictable way of knowing what
values to not pass as parameter if you don't want to crash.  Since the
pattern of calls that doesn't crash (i.e. my work-around, see earlier
notes on this bug) depends on hardware architecture, this means the
code needs to change, even if the documentation is changed.

Eddy.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8743