https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78959
--- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Tue Jan 10 22:45:52 2017
New Revision: 244298
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=244298=gcc=rev
Log:
PR testsuite/78960 - FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/builtin-sprintf.c execution test
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78959
--- Comment #6 from John David Anglin ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #1)
> The test output
>
> "4105" => 4
>
> indicates that on HP-UX the %hhd directive doesn't convert the int argument
> (4105) to unsigned char to end up with 9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78959
--- Comment #5 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2017-01-01, at 4:12 PM, msebor at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> Or were you saying that prior to HP-UX 11.31 printf didn't have %hhd at all
> and
> treated it as an ordinary string (or undefined
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78959
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78959
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor ---
Or were you saying that prior to HP-UX 11.31 printf didn't have %hhd at all and
treated it as an ordinary string (or undefined behavior)? If it's the latter
the test change alone would probably be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78959
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor ---
Okay, thanks. I can add that but shouldn't the pass still correctly handle the
pre-C99 HP-UX behavior (i.e., when HAVE_C99_RUNTIME is not defined)? (In case
it's not apparent from the test, it fails because
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78959
--- Comment #2 from John David Anglin ---
I think this is a c99 feature and we should add the following to test:
/* { dg-require-effective-target c99_runtime } */
It looks as if 11.31 supports the %hhd directive but not earlier versions.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78959
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
