--- Comment #12 from mark at codesourcery dot com 2005-11-14 18:27 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] ICE on pointer initialization
with C99 initializer
dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #11 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-14 18:14
> ---
> Mark,
--- Comment #11 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-14 18:14
---
Mark, the frontend is producing the address of a constructor, and nothing in
the middle end used to be really analyzing static iniatlizers which is why it
didn't break before (those that do try to look at them woul
--- Comment #10 from mark at codesourcery dot com 2005-11-14 17:59 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] ICE on pointer initialization
with C99 initializer
giovannibajo at libero dot it wrote:
> --- Comment #9 from giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-11-14 00:30
> ---
> Mark, do
--- Comment #9 from giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-11-14 00:30 ---
Mark, do you believe that the introduction of COMPOUND_LITERAL_EXPR in the C++
frontend could be feasable for 4.1?
--
giovannibajo at libero dot it changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-31 04:31
---
Leaving as P2.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23171
--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-09
17:00 ---
It's a latent FE bug, hopefully one that an FE person can solve.
It's out of my FE experience league, unfortunately.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23171
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-09
17:00 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> The testcase starts failing with this patch from zadeck and dberlin:
It was decided this was really a latent front-end bug.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2317
--- Additional Comments From janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-09 16:57
---
The testcase starts failing with this patch from zadeck and dberlin:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2005-07/msg00635.html
--
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-04
17:27 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > How does the C front end represent this expression?
>
> Using a COMPOUND_LITERAL_EXPR which should solve this and PR 23172.
And PR 20103.
--
ht
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-22
11:46 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> How does the C front end represent this expression?
Using a COMPOUND_LITERAL_EXPR which should solve this and PR 23172.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23171
--- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-22
05:15 ---
How does the C front end represent this expression?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23171
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-01
11:58 ---
This is the same problem as PR 22533 really.
So it is not only the Ada front-end that produces &CONSTRUCTOR.
--
What|Removed |Added
-
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
||org
Target Milestone|---
13 matches
Mail list logo
