I once wrote a C++ program using a huge constexpr std::array having a lot a ctor (also constexpr). Gcc miserably failed with a core dump after more than 1mn of compilation. In a sense, tcc is gcc compatible :o)
C. -----Original Message----- From: Tinycc-devel [mailto:tinycc-devel-bounces+eligis=orange...@nongnu.org] On Behalf Of Pascal Cuoq Sent: Monday, December 30, 2019 05:51 To: tinycc-devel@nongnu.org Subject: Re: [Tinycc-devel] A stack-overflow in tinycc-f150f93/tccpp.c Hello, > On 29 Dec 2019, at 23:31, Daniel Glöckner <daniel...@gmx.net> wrote: > > Adding recursion depth limitation into all cycles of this graph is a > lot of work. It would also be counter-productive. Currently it takes a single ulimit command to compile a larger-than-usual program, but if tcc enforced its own limits there would be several settings to tweak. I don't know any compiler that does not stack overflow on sufficiently large inputs. Tcc is only structured in a way that a dumb fuzzer can find an input that produces this behavior by just repeating the character *. This does not sound like a security issue, or even an issue. Pascal _______________________________________________ Tinycc-devel mailing list Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel _______________________________________________ Tinycc-devel mailing list Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
