http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
--- Comment #29 from joe at mcknight dot de 2011-04-06 17:55:30 UTC ---
FWIW, I can reproduce this now on Solaris without any magic compiler switches:
The program is just this here:
---
void
foo(char *buf, int bufsz);
void
foo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
joe at mcknight dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
--- Comment #27 from joe at mcknight dot de 2011-03-16 14:40:32 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #26)
> > Can we use anything else to terminate the loop? Is there any other debug
> > output
> > that would be helpful for you?
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
--- Comment #25 from joe at mcknight dot de 2011-03-16 12:58:50 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #24)
> Well, it confirmed that void_list_node is not used, but I can't
> reproduce this fact.
Then how should we go on with this? As said,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
--- Comment #23 from joe at mcknight dot de 2011-03-15 17:05:24 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #22)
> > Compare it to:
> >
> > typedef int mytype;
> > int myfunc2(mytype var) {
> > return 1;
> > };
> >
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
--- Comment #21 from joe at mcknight dot de 2011-03-15 16:18:37 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #19)
> All looks good to me with your C testcase:
>
> (gdb) call debug_generic_expr (fndecl->common.type)
> int (struct
> {
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
--- Comment #20 from joe at mcknight dot de 2011-03-15 16:03:23 UTC ---
Unfortunately I cannot confirm that this bug is fixed, so I need to reopen it.
For one thing this bug is not only about variadic functions, but
dump_function_declaration
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
--- Comment #17 from joe at mcknight dot de 2011-03-15 15:53:23 UTC ---
Created attachment 23666
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23666
debug output from a run of the modified function
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
--- Comment #16 from joe at mcknight dot de 2011-03-15 15:52:01 UTC ---
Created attachment 23665
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23665
dump_function_declaration with debug
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
--- Comment #13 from joe at mcknight dot de 2011-02-10 22:50:51 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-01/msg00956.html for a patch
> (queued for 4.7, several tree-dump check testcases have to be ad
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
--- Comment #12 from joe at mcknight dot de 2011-02-09 18:14:36 UTC ---
> > That could be related to the function pointer issue where
> > print_generic_decl()
> > also rather repeats the declaration instead of printing the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
--- Comment #11 from joe at mcknight dot de 2011-02-09 18:11:10 UTC ---
Created attachment 23286
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23286
A C file that provokes wrong output of print_generic_decl()
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
--- Comment #10 from joe at mcknight dot de 2011-02-09 18:08:32 UTC ---
Created attachment 23285
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23285
A small test plugin that calls print_generic_decl()
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
--- Comment #8 from joe at mcknight dot de 2011-02-09 16:23:44 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-01/msg00956.html for a patch
> (queued for 4.7, several tree-dump check testcases have to be ad
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
--- Comment #7 from joe at mcknight dot de 2011-02-09 14:22:48 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-01/msg00956.html for a patch
> (queued for 4.7, several tree-dump check testcases have to be ad
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
--- Comment #5 from joe at mcknight dot de 2011-02-08 20:16:28 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Well I think you need to debug it to see why it is printing out static, it
> might because a bit on tree has not been set yet.
The static is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
--- Comment #3 from joe at mcknight dot de 2011-02-08 20:08:51 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> print_generic_decl is designed for debugging reasons only. Any other use is a
> bit bogus. Also asking for help with plugins is not really
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
--- Comment #1 from joe at mcknight dot de 2011-02-08 19:09:41 UTC ---
here's another example where print_generic_decl() fails:
---
typedef void (*Handler)( int , void * );
Handler GetFunctionPo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
Summary: wrong output of print_generic_decl() called from a
plugin
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
19 matches
Mail list logo
