------- Comment #27 from dcb314 at hotmail dot com 2006-02-18 14:33 ------- (In reply to comment #21) > hmm, thanks. it should have looked like this:
I tried your second patch, and the compile of the compiler got as far as the following /home/dcb/gnu/42-20060211/working/./prev-gcc/xgcc -B/home/dcb/gnu/42-20060211/working/./prev-gcc/ -B/home/dcb/gnu/42-20060211/results/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/ -c -g -O2 -DIN_GCC -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -pedantic -Wno-long-long -Wno-variadic-macros -Wno-overlength-strings -Wold-style-definition -Wmissing-format-attribute -Werror -fno-common -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I../../src/gcc-4.2-20060211/gcc -I../../src/gcc-4.2-20060211/gcc/. -I../../src/gcc-4.2-20060211/gcc/../include -I../../src/gcc-4.2-20060211/gcc/../libcpp/include -I../../src/gcc-4.2-20060211/gcc/../libdecnumber -I../libdecnumber ../../src/gcc-4.2-20060211/gcc/real.c -o real.o../../src/gcc-4.2-20060211/gcc/real.c: In function 'real_to_integer2': ../../src/gcc-4.2-20060211/gcc/real.c:1385: error: array reference -1 below range min (0) ../../src/gcc-4.2-20060211/gcc/real.c: In function 'real_from_integer': ../../src/gcc-4.2-20060211/gcc/real.c:2050: error: array reference -1 below range min (0) ../../src/gcc-4.2-20060211/gcc/real.c: In function 'encode_ieee_quad': ../../src/gcc-4.2-20060211/gcc/real.c:3564: error: array reference 3 above range max (2) ../../src/gcc-4.2-20060211/gcc/real.c:3615: error: array reference 3 above range max (2) ../../src/gcc-4.2-20060211/gcc/real.c: In function 'decode_ieee_quad': ../../src/gcc-4.2-20060211/gcc/real.c:3693: error: array reference 3 above range max (2) ../../src/gcc-4.2-20060211/gcc/real.c:3719: error: array reference 3 above range max (2) ../../src/gcc-4.2-20060211/gcc/real.c:3745: error: array reference 3 above range max (2) It seems that a combination of the new warning and the Werror flag prevents compilation. On the other point about using arrayName[ 4] for the "end of struct" hack, I'd be entirely happy with false positives. Folks who want that hack can just say arrayName[ 1] to avoid the new warning anyway. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8268