| Summary: | [4.0 Regression] wrong code with operator "?" | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | gcc | Reporter: | Serge Belyshev <belyshev> |
| Component: | middle-end | Assignee: | Not yet assigned to anyone <unassigned> |
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
| Severity: | critical | CC: | gcc-bugs |
| Priority: | P2 | Keywords: | wrong-code |
| Version: | 4.0.0 | ||
| Target Milestone: | 4.0.0 | ||
| Host: | Target: | ||
| Build: | Known to work: | 3.3.5 3.4.4 | |
| Known to fail: | 4.0.0 | Last reconfirmed: | 2004-12-10 11:55:30 |
We are getting rid of " (k ? 0 : j++) == -1;" for some reason even though it has side effects. Subject: Bug 18921 CVSROOT: /cvs/gcc Module name: gcc Changes by: sayle@gcc.gnu.org 2004-12-11 13:46:37 Modified files: gcc : ChangeLog fold-const.c gcc/testsuite : ChangeLog Added files: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg: pr18921-1.c Log message: PR middle-end/18921 * fold-const.c (fold_unwidened_comparison): Use omit_one_operand instead of constant_boolean_node as arg0 may have side-effects. * gcc.dg/pr18921-1.c: New test case. Patches: http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=2.6780&r2=2.6781 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/fold-const.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.483&r2=1.484 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.4738&r2=1.4739 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr18921-1.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=NONE&r2=1.1 Fixed. |
this program aborts if compiled with any options: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- extern void abort (void); int foo (int k) { unsigned char j = 0; (k ? 0 : j++) == -1; return j; } int main () { if (!foo (0)) abort (); return 0; } ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------