This is the mail archive of the gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Strange CPP failures

From: Jason R Thorpe <thorpej at wasabisystems dot com>
To: Neil Booth <neil at daikokuya dot co dot uk>
Cc: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org, "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk>,Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 14:41:59 -0700
Subject: Re: Strange CPP failures
Organization: Wasabi Systems, Inc.
References: <20020712001920.AE89B7DA4@yeah-baby.shagadelic.org> <20020712090211.H12337@dr-evil.shagadelic.org> <20020712170535.GB12262@daikokuya.co.uk> <20020712101528.I12337@dr-evil.shagadelic.org> <20020716211124.GA5316@daikokuya.co.uk>

On Tue, Jul 16, 2002 at 10:11:24PM +0100, Neil Booth wrote:

 > <scratches head, examines assembler>.  This is actually a bug
 > in our bool typedef I think (which would explain a lot of the
 > random errors, and why recompiling with later compilers, which
 > contain a correct _Bool, fixes them).

Yow.

 > Joseph - what to do about this?  I don't think adding "!= 0"
 > is a good fix - the typedef to char is fundamentally broken.
 > I don't see how a typedef to anything can really work in these
 > cases.

Not depending on C99 semantics is imporant, I think -- if you're making
cross compilers, you can't always control the compiler on the host.

Thanks A MILLION for looking into this, Neil!

-- 
        -- Jason R. Thorpe <thorpej@wasabisystems.com>

References:
- Strange CPP failures
  - From: Jason R Thorpe
- Re: Strange CPP failures
  - From: Neil Booth
- Re: Strange CPP failures
  - From: Jason R Thorpe
- Re: Strange CPP failures
  - From: Neil Booth

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]