the gcc developers responded somewhat prick-like stating that it's the
programmer's fault
anyways the interim solution is to pass the "-fno-builtin-printf" to the
compiler
--
Printf inconsistency when handed null string
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/193795
You received this bug notification be
> How can I do that?
You could try posting to their mailing list.
http://gcc.gnu.org/lists.html
--
Printf inconsistency when handed null string
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/193795
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
How can I do that?
On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 3:29 AM, Malcolm Parsons
wrote:
> I think you need to try to convince the gcc developers that this is a
> bug.
>
> --
> Printf inconsistency when handed null string
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/193795
> You received this bug notification because you
I think you need to try to convince the gcc developers that this is a
bug.
--
Printf inconsistency when handed null string
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/193795
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing lis
I've traced the file that does the optimization to
/usr/src/gcc-4.3/gcc-4.3.3/gcc/builtins.c
The functions are
fold_builtin_printf()
fold_builtin_sprintf()
the functions return a tree that seems to point straight to some puts()
or putchar() construct
that return tree should be modified to incl
I've been digging through the gcc-4.3 source, looking for where the compiler
swaps
printf("%s\n",str);
with
puts(str);
but the source is huge and I have no idea where or how to find the code
responsible for this.
I would happily patch this, provided I can get some direction on where I
can find t
** Changed in: gcc-4.3 (Ubuntu)
Status: Triaged => Confirmed
--
Printf inconsistency when handed null string
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/193795
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubunt
gcc optimises printf to puts.
They behave differently, so the optimisation is invalid.
** Changed in: gcc-4.3 (Ubuntu)
Sourcepackagename: glibc => gcc-4.3
--
Printf inconsistency when handed null string
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/193795
You received this bug notification because you are a m
** Changed in: glibc (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided => Low
Status: New => Triaged
--
Printf inconsistency when handed null string
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/193795
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu
I agree 100% that it is the programmer's responsibility to check for
null pointers and found this bug through testing of my own code.
I also played around with it last night and confirm as well that my
original guess at the cause of this behavior was incorrect.
The only reason I reported this beh
I can confirm this behaviour.
I am not sure that you've correctly identified the cause, though.
Looking at the disassembled machine code for both function calls, I
found that 'printf("%s\n")' isn't handled by printf() at all -- the
compiler inserts a call to puts() instead. puts(), in turn, calls
Small correction: vfprintf.c not vprintf.c. Sorry for the typo.
--
Printf inconsistency when handed null string
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/193795
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is the bug contact for Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
u
12 matches
Mail list logo
