This is the mail archive of the 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: [tree-ssa] Fix for failure to build glibc

In message <>, "
Joseph S. Myers" writes:
 >On Thu, 8 May 2003 wrote:
 >> In message <>, Jason Merrill writ
 >>  >Why is this necessary?  Do you have a continue in a statement-expression
 >>  >which refers to a loop outside the statement-expression?
 >> Yup:
 >>  >void
 >> _dl_map_object_deps ()
 >> {
 >>           for (;;)
 >>                       (
 >>                        {
 >>                           continue;
 >>                          "hello";
 >>                          }
 >>                          );
 >> }
 >The conclusion from a discussion three years ago, reflected in PR c/772,
 >was that the specification of statement expressions should treat this sort
 >of thing (jumps in or out of statement expressions) as a constraint
 >violation.  It just so happens that no-one has implemented that yet.  
 >(The discussion may not have mentioned jumps via continue, but they are
 >just as problematic as those via goto.)
Understood.  But the reality is that this construct is clearly used and
having tree-ssa break it won't fly.

If we're going to declare this code invalid, then we need to get the
mainline compiler doing it first.


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