The following code tl.c is accepted by gcc with a warning. g++ does reject this code with an error. Earlier g++ versions show the same behaviour as gcc, though. Was this a deliberate change? This recent change breaks libs/date_time/test/testtime_resolution_traits.cpp from boost. Release: 3.3 20021011 (experimental) Environment: System: Linux kiste 2.4.18 #8 Sat Mar 9 15:33:15 CET 2002 i686 unknown Architecture: i686 GNU ld version 2.13.90.0.4 20020814 host: i686-pc-linux-gnu build: i686-pc-linux-gnu target: i686-pc-linux-gnu configured with: ../gcc/configure --enable-shared --disable-nls --enable-threads=posix --enable-languages=c,c++,f77,objc --enable-__cxa_atexit How-To-Repeat: source code tll.c int main() { long long l = 60000000000; /* long long l = 60000000000LL; */ l++; } g++ -v tll.c -W -Wall Reading specs from /usr/local/lib/gcc-lib/i686-pc-linux-gnu/3.3/specs Configured with: ../gcc/configure --enable-shared --disable-nls --enable-threads=posix --enable-languages=c,c++,f77,objc --enable-__cxa_atexit Thread model: posix gcc version 3.3 20021011 (experimental) /usr/local/lib/gcc-lib/i686-pc-linux-gnu/3.3/cc1plus -quiet -v -D__GNUC__=3 -D__GNUC_MINOR__=3 -D__GNUC_PATCHLEVEL__=0 -D_GNU_SOURCE tll.c -D__GNUG__=3 -quiet -dumpbase tll.c -auxbase tll -W -Wall -version -o /tmp/ccvxjZvf.s GNU C++ version 3.3 20021011 (experimental) (i686-pc-linux-gnu) compiled by GNU C version 3.3 20021011 (experimental). ignoring nonexistent directory "NONE/include" ignoring nonexistent directory "/usr/local/i686-pc-linux-gnu/include" #include "..." search starts here: #include <...> search starts here: /usr/local/include/c++/3.3 /usr/local/include/c++/3.3/i686-pc-linux-gnu /usr/local/include/c++/3.3/backward /usr/local/include /usr/local/lib/gcc-lib/i686-pc-linux-gnu/3.3/include /usr/include End of search list. tll.c: In function `int main()': tll.c:3: error: integer constant is too large for "long" type gcc -v tll.c -W -Wall Reading specs from /usr/local/lib/gcc-lib/i686-pc-linux-gnu/3.3/specs Configured with: ../gcc/configure --enable-shared --disable-nls --enable-threads=posix --enable-languages=c,c++,f77,objc --enable-__cxa_atexit Thread model: posix gcc version 3.3 20021011 (experimental) /usr/local/lib/gcc-lib/i686-pc-linux-gnu/3.3/cc1 -quiet -v -D__GNUC__=3 -D__GNUC_MINOR__=3 -D__GNUC_PATCHLEVEL__=0 tll.c -quiet -dumpbase tll.c -auxbase tll -W -Wall -version -o /tmp/cclsJVab.s GNU C version 3.3 20021011 (experimental) (i686-pc-linux-gnu) compiled by GNU C version 3.3 20021011 (experimental). ignoring nonexistent directory "NONE/include" ignoring nonexistent directory "/usr/local/i686-pc-linux-gnu/include" #include "..." search starts here: #include <...> search starts here: /usr/local/include /usr/local/lib/gcc-lib/i686-pc-linux-gnu/3.3/include /usr/include End of search list. tll.c: In function `main': tll.c:3: warning: integer constant is too large for "long" type tll.c:5: warning: control reaches end of non-void function /usr/local/lib/gcc-lib/i686-pc-linux-gnu/3.3/../../../../i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/as -V -Qy -o /tmp/ccyBpvwh.o /tmp/cclsJVab.s GNU assembler version 2.13.90.0.4 (i686-pc-linux-gnu) using BFD version 2.13.90.0.4 20020814 /usr/local/lib/gcc-lib/i686-pc-linux-gnu/3.3/collect2 --eh-frame-hdr -m elf_i386 -dynamic-linker /lib/ld-linux.so.2 /usr/lib/crt1.o /usr/lib/crti.o /usr/local/lib/gcc-lib/i686-pc-linux-gnu/3.3/crtbegin.o -L/usr/local/lib/gcc-lib/i686-pc-linux-gnu/3.3 -L/usr/local/lib/gcc-lib/i686-pc-linux-gnu/3.3/../../../../i686-pc-linux-gnu/lib -L/usr/local/lib/gcc-lib/i686-pc-linux-gnu/3.3/../../.. /tmp/ccyBpvwh.o -lgcc -lgcc_eh -lc -lgcc -lgcc_eh /usr/local/lib/gcc-lib/i686-pc-linux-gnu/3.3/crtend.o /usr/lib/crtn.o
State-Changed-From-To: open->analyzed State-Changed-Why: I can confirm the thing, but am unsure what to say: the code seems illegal if you don't add the LL postfix, so what's wrong in rejecting it? int main() { long long l = 60000000000; /* long long l = 60000000000LL; */ l++; }
Should this warning in C be an error or a warning? Should the error in C++ be a warning?
I think C should reject this also.
The C standard says the LL is not required, a constant is LL when it doesn't fit into a smaller type automatically. IMHO, it should be the same in C++, since that is constistent with C and consistent with the analoguous promotion to long and is most likely what a future C++ standard would say. But I think others have argued to the contrary.
So changing this back to c++ based on Falk's anlysis, I agruee with Falk here.
This is a dup of bug 13358. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 13358 ***