[Bug c++/22551] [4.0/4.1 Regression] [ICE] in tree_low_cst, at tree.c:3843

2005-10-19 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #16 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-10-19 12:48 
---
Subject: Bug 22551

CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2005-10-19 12:48:03

Modified files:
gcc/cp : ChangeLog typeck2.c 

Log message:
PR c++/22551
* typeck2.c (digest_init): Clear overflow flags on the folded
initializer.

Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/cp/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcconly_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branchr1=1.4648.2.147r2=1.4648.2.148
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/cp/typeck2.c.diff?cvsroot=gcconly_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branchr1=1.182.8.1r2=1.182.8.2


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22551

[Bug c++/22551] [4.0/4.1 Regression] [ICE] in tree_low_cst, at tree.c:3843

2005-10-19 Thread nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #17 from nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-10-19 12:50 ---
fix for 4.0 2005-10-19  Nathan Sidwell  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

PR c++/22551
* typeck2.c (digest_init): Clear overflow flags on the folded
initializer.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22551

[Bug c++/22551] [4.0/4.1 Regression] [ICE] in tree_low_cst, at tree.c:3843

2005-10-17 Thread nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #12 from nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-10-17 08:36 ---
the overflow happens in the static constant assignment 'int b = 0x8000'
assigns an unsigned long to an int, and overflows.  The int_cst as b's
DCL_INITIAL has the overflow flag set.  I rejected clearing the overflow flag
at that point, because I was worried about other overflow paths on the case
label expression (although I failed to excite any).


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22551

[Bug c++/22551] [4.0/4.1 Regression] [ICE] in tree_low_cst, at tree.c:3843

2005-10-17 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #13 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-10-17 13:54 
---
Subject: Bug 22551

CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2005-10-17 13:54:34

Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog c-common.c 
gcc/testsuite  : ChangeLog 
gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/other: switch2.C 

Log message:
.:
PR c++/22551
* c-common.c (c_add_case_label): Revert my 2005-10-14 clearing of
overflow flags.
testsuite:
PR c++/22551
* g++.dg/other/switch2.C: Remove expected warnings.

Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gccr1=2.10172r2=2.10173
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/c-common.c.diff?cvsroot=gccr1=1.656r2=1.657
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gccr1=1.6203r2=1.6204
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/other/switch2.C.diff?cvsroot=gccr1=1.1r2=1.2


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22551

[Bug c++/22551] [4.0/4.1 Regression] [ICE] in tree_low_cst, at tree.c:3843

2005-10-17 Thread nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #14 from nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-10-17 13:57 ---
refixed
2005-10-17  Nathan Sidwell  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

PR c++/22551
* c-common.c (c_add_case_label): Revert my 2005-10-14 clearing of
overflow flags.

2005-10-17  Nathan Sidwell  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

PR c++/22551
* g++.dg/other/switch2.C: Remove expected warnings.


-- 

nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22551

[Bug c++/22551] [4.0/4.1 Regression] [ICE] in tree_low_cst, at tree.c:3843

2005-10-17 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #15 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-10-17 13:57 
---
Subject: Bug 22551

CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2005-10-17 13:57:37

Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog c-common.c 
gcc/testsuite  : ChangeLog 
gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/other: switch2.C 

Log message:
.:
PR c++/22551
* c-common.c (c_add_case_label): Revert my 2005-10-14 clearing of
overflow flags.
testsuite:
PR c++/22551
* g++.dg/other/switch2.C: Remove expected warnings.

Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcconly_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branchr1=2.7592.2.467r2=2.7592.2.468
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/c-common.c.diff?cvsroot=gcconly_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branchr1=1.606.2.9r2=1.606.2.10
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcconly_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branchr1=1.5084.2.462r2=1.5084.2.463
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/other/switch2.C.diff?cvsroot=gcconly_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branchr1=1.1.2.1r2=1.1.2.2


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22551

[Bug c++/22551] [4.0/4.1 Regression] [ICE] in tree_low_cst, at tree.c:3843

2005-10-16 Thread nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #10 from nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-10-16 09:02 ---
something is not quite right ...


-- 

nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
 Resolution|FIXED   |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22551

[Bug c++/22551] [4.0/4.1 Regression] [ICE] in tree_low_cst, at tree.c:3843

2005-10-16 Thread mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #11 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-10-16 22:06 
---
The new switch2.C test is failing for me.  In fact, I'm not sure why we should
see overflow warnings on these expressions; isn't 0x8000 INT_MIN?  In
that case, INT_MIN + 1 does not overflow, does it?  The C front end in GCC
3.4.x does not warn about the equivalent C program.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22551

[Bug c++/22551] [4.0/4.1 Regression] [ICE] in tree_low_cst, at tree.c:3843

2005-10-14 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #7 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-10-14 12:55 
---
Subject: Bug 22551

CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2005-10-14 12:55:33

Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog c-common.c 
gcc/testsuite  : ChangeLog 
Added files:
gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/other: switch2.C 

Log message:
.:
PR c++/22551
* c-common.c (c_add_case_label): Clear LOW_VALUE and HIGH_VALUE's
overflow flags.  Refactor some conditionals.
testsuite:
PR c++/22551
* g++.dg/other/switch2.C: New.

Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gccr1=2.10156r2=2.10157
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/c-common.c.diff?cvsroot=gccr1=1.655r2=1.656
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gccr1=1.6190r2=1.6191
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/other/switch2.C.diff?cvsroot=gccr1=NONEr2=1.1


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22551

[Bug c++/22551] [4.0/4.1 Regression] [ICE] in tree_low_cst, at tree.c:3843

2005-10-14 Thread nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #8 from nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-10-14 13:00 ---
fixed mainline and 4.0
2005-10-14  Nathan Sidwell  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

PR c++/22551
* c-common.c (c_add_case_label): Clear LOW_VALUE and HIGH_VALUE's
overflow flags.  Refactor some conditionals.


-- 

nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22551

[Bug c++/22551] [4.0/4.1 Regression] [ICE] in tree_low_cst, at tree.c:3843

2005-10-14 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #9 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-10-14 13:00 
---
Subject: Bug 22551

CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2005-10-14 13:00:38

Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog c-common.c 
gcc/testsuite  : ChangeLog 
Added files:
gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/other: switch2.C 

Log message:
.:
PR c++/22551
* c-common.c (c_add_case_label): Clear LOW_VALUE and HIGH_VALUE's
overflow flags.  Refactor some conditionals.
testsuite:
PR c++/22551
* g++.dg/other/switch2.C: New.

Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcconly_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branchr1=2.7592.2.464r2=2.7592.2.465
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/c-common.c.diff?cvsroot=gcconly_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branchr1=1.606.2.8r2=1.606.2.9
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcconly_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branchr1=1.5084.2.455r2=1.5084.2.456
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/other/switch2.C.diff?cvsroot=gcconly_with_tag=gcc-4_0-branchr1=NONEr2=1.1.2.1


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22551

[Bug c++/22551] [4.0/4.1 Regression] [ICE] in tree_low_cst, at tree.c:3843

2005-10-13 Thread nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org 


-- 

nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu   |nathan at gcc dot gnu dot
   |dot org |org
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Last reconfirmed|2005-07-18 17:27:27 |2005-10-13 11:52:39
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22551

[Bug c++/22551] [4.0/4.1 Regression] [ICE] in tree_low_cst, at tree.c:3843

2005-09-27 Thread mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 


-- 
   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|4.0.2   |4.0.3


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22551

[Bug c++/22551] [4.0/4.1 Regression] [ICE] in tree_low_cst, at tree.c:3843

2005-09-12 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-09-12 
20:48 ---
: Search converges between 2004-08-05-trunk (#505) and 2004-08-06-trunk (#506).


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22551

[Bug c++/22551] [4.0/4.1 Regression] [ICE] in tree_low_cst, at tree.c:3843

2005-09-09 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-09-10 
03:17 ---
I think the front-end is not remarking the INTEGER_CST's TREE_OVERFLOW to be 
zero.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22551

[Bug c++/22551] [4.0/4.1 Regression] [ICE] in tree_low_cst, at tree.c:3843

2005-07-18 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-18 
17:27 ---
Hmm, 0x8000+1 overflows which is invalid for constant expressions and 
really should be 
rejected.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever Confirmed||1
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-07-18 17:27:27
   date||
Summary|[ICE] in tree_low_cst, at   |[4.0/4.1 Regression] [ICE]
   |tree.c:3843 |in tree_low_cst, at
   ||tree.c:3843
   Target Milestone|--- |4.0.2


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22551

[Bug c++/22551] [4.0/4.1 Regression] [ICE] in tree_low_cst, at tree.c:3843

2005-07-18 Thread emailwastefilter-bugzillagccorg at yahoo dot com 

--- Additional Comments From emailwastefilter-bugzillagccorg at yahoo dot 
com  2005-07-18 18:03 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
 Hmm, 0x8000+1 overflows which is invalid for constant expressions and
really should be 
 rejected.

The warnings seem on the money, but they should not cause the compiler to crash,
right?

The original code used 0xFFFE in place of 0x8000 and had around 26
warning messages before it crashed.  If there are only 4 warning messages, then
the compiler completes without crashing.  Starting with 0x8000 - 2 lets the
compiler complete, as does commenting out one of the case statements.

Several obivous ways around this code are to use an enum, an unsigned int, or an
if-else if cascasde.  These all result in no warnings, the first two justly, the
last I'm not so sure.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22551

[Bug c++/22551] [4.0/4.1 Regression] [ICE] in tree_low_cst, at tree.c:3843

2005-07-18 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-07-18 
18:05 ---
If you add -pedantic and compile your example, you will see that we error out 
instead of accepting the 
code.

You might want to use unsigned instead of signed as signed overflow is 
undefined.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22551