--- Comment #8 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-04 17:01 ---
Fixed for 4.2.
--
jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #7 from mrs at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-18 18:22 ---
Subject: Bug 18740
Author: mrs
Date: Thu May 18 18:22:12 2006
New Revision: 113888
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=113888
Log:
Fix up vla, vm and [*] sematics.
PR c/18740
--- Comment #6 from mrs at apple dot com 2006-05-09 00:47 ---
I have a fix for this.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18740
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18740
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-21 13:43
---
I'm wrong. What a stupid thing to do to the C language.
Someone should be smacked.
--
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-21 13:39
---
Not a bug. Sizeof *never* has side effects.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-21
11:15 ---
Reproducible on x86 and x86-64.
--
What|Removed |Added
GCC build triplet|sparc-sun-solar
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org
OtherBugsDependingO||16989
nThis|
--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2004-11-30 22:48
---
Actually, this requires more thought. I quoted from the C++ standard, but
the bug is for C, and the problem lies here: the code is
-
size_t fsize3 (int n)
{
int i = 0;
char b[1][n+3];
--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2004-11-30 22:24
---
That's not a bug. The standard says this:
5.3.3 Sizeof[expr.sizeof]
1 The sizeof operator yields the number of bytes in the object
representation
--
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18740
11 matches
Mail list logo
