This is the mail archive of the
gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: c/9163: [3.3/3.4 regression] ICE in genrtl_compound_stmt at c-semantics.c:776 with c99 mode
- From: "Christian Ehrhardt" <ehrhardt at mathematik dot uni-ulm dot de>
- To: nobody at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Cc: gcc-prs at gcc dot gnu dot org,
- Date: 7 Jan 2003 14:16:04 -0000
- Subject: Re: c/9163: [3.3/3.4 regression] ICE in genrtl_compound_stmt at c-semantics.c:776 with c99 mode
- Reply-to: "Christian Ehrhardt" <ehrhardt at mathematik dot uni-ulm dot de>
The following reply was made to PR c/9163; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: "Christian Ehrhardt" <ehrhardt@mathematik.uni-ulm.de>
To: Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou@libertysurf.fr>
Cc: bangerth@dealii.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org,
nobody@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: c/9163: [3.3/3.4 regression] ICE in genrtl_compound_stmt at c-semantics.c:776 with c99 mode
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 15:11:34 +0100
On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 12:41:17PM +0100, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> I'm very skeptical, because the only change between 20021213 and 20021218 was:
> [ ... ]
> The ICE is triggered by:
>
> #ifdef ENABLE_CHECKING
> /* Make sure that we've pushed and popped the same number of levels. */
> if (!COMPOUND_STMT_NO_SCOPE (t) && n != current_nesting_level ())
> abort ();
> #endif
>
> that is, the parse error is confusing the regular handling of nested scopes.
>
> So I think that the problem has been there for a long time, and that
> Wolfgang's 20021213 version was configured with --disable-checking.
Agreed. So this might not even be a regression at all because tree
checking was disabled on all the versions where it worked for me.
Thanks for pointing this out.
regards Christian
--
THAT'S ALL FOLKS!