Fault report

[Wolfgang dot Roehrl at de dot gi-de dot com]

Dear all,

I would like to post two fault reports for the GNU C/C++ compiler 3.3-e500.

We use the compiler to generate code for a PowerPc processor and one bug
is related to to code generator and the other bug is related to the
compiler front
end.

Used invokation line for the C++ compiler:

ccppc -c -x c++ -ansi -Wall -Werror -mcpu=8540 -fverbose-asm -mbig
-mmultiple
      -mno-string -mstrict-align -O3 -fno-exceptions -fno-rtti
      -I<different include paths>
      -D<differen #define's>
      Z.CPP -oZ.O



Fault report 1 (templates and pointer to const member):
=======================================================

// example program 1

template <typename T_>
class C1
{
public:
    C1 ();
    ~C1 ();
    const int C1<T_>::* getPtr () const;

private:
    int x;
    T_ y;
};


template <typename T_>
const int C1<T_>::* C1<T_>::getPtr () const
{ return &C1<T_>::x; }                      // <-- line 17


The compiler gives the following error message:

z.CPP:17: error: too few template parameter lists in declaration of `const
int
   C1<T_>::* C1<T_>::getPtr() const'


We get no error message if a typedef is introduced:

// example program 2

template <typename T_>
class C1
{
    typedef const int C1<T_>::* T_C1_INT_PTR;

public:
    C1 ();
    ~C1 ();
    T_C1_INT_PTR getPtr () const;

private:
    int x;
    T_ y;
};


template <typename T_>
typename C1<T_>::T_C1_INT_PTR C1<T_>::getPtr () const
{ return &C1<T_>::x; }



Fault report 2 (::delete and multiple inheritance):
===================================================

// example program

class B1
{
public:
    virtual ~B1 () throw();

protected:
    B1 ();

private:
    int x;
};


class B2
{
public:
    virtual ~B2 () throw();

protected:
    B2 ();

private:
    int x;
};


class D : public B1, public B2
{
public:
    D ();
    ~D () throw();

private:
    int y;
};


void f1 (D*);
void f2 (B2*);
void f3 (B1*);


void f (void)
{
    f1 (::new D);
    f2 (::new D);     // correct address adjustement D -> B2, see assembler
listing
    f3 (::new D);
}


void f1 (D* p) { ::delete p; }
void f2 (B2* p) { ::delete p; }  // missing address adjustment B2 -> D for
the call of ::operator delete()
void f3 (B1* p) { ::delete p; }


In function f2() the deallocation function ::operator delete() (assembler
call 'bl _ZdlPv') is called, but the deallocation function does not get the
address of the
dynamic D-object.

The corresponding assembler listing is attached as file GNU1.TXT.

I think that the code above is legal, cf. the C++ standard 5.3.4/9, 5.3.4
/18
(for constructor exceptions) and 5.3.5/8.



With kind regards
W. Roehrl


(See attached file: Gnu1.txt)

Attachment: Gnu1.txt
Description: Binary data