Your message dated Sun, 15 Feb 2009 16:42:39 GMT
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line m2c has been removed from Debian, closing #168588
has caused the Debian Bug report #168588,
regarding m2c generates bad code for nested calls
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)


-- 
168588: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=168588
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: m2c

Version: 0.6-8

Severity: important

m2c uses a single union for parameters of all calls inside 
a single procedure. In effect if second or subsequent arguments 
are obtained from nested calls the first argument (and 
possibly some more) gets garbled. The program below illustrates 
the problem:

MODULE ttt;
FROM InOut IMPORT WriteLn, WriteString;

PROCEDURE FOO(i : INTEGER): INTEGER;

BEGIN
        RETURN 2
END FOO;

PROCEDURE BAR(i, j : INTEGER);

BEGIN
        IF i = 1 THEN
                WriteString("OK");
                WriteLn;
        ELSE
                WriteString("Failed");
                WriteLn;
        END
END BAR;

BEGIN
        BAR(1, FOO(2))
END ttt
.

I would personaly consider the problem to be of 'grave' severity, 
but since the problem was undiscovered for 4 years I assume 
that nobody earlier tried to compile with m2c code containig 
nested calls, so I put only 'important' severity in the header.

-- 
                              Waldek Hebisch
[email protected]    or [email protected] 


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Version: 0.6-10.2+rm

The m2c package has been removed from Debian testing, unstable and
experimental, so I am now closing the bugs that were still opened
against it.

For more information about this package's removal, read
http://bugs.debian.org/503518 . That bug might give the reasons why
this package was removed, and suggestions of possible replacements.

Don't hesitate to reply to this mail if you have any question.

Thank you for your contribution to Debian.

Kind regards,
--
Marco Rodrigues


--- End Message ---

Reply via email to