This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GCC's statement expression extension
- To: kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu
- Subject: Re: GCC's statement expression extension
- From: Jim Wilson <wilson at cygnus dot com>
- Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 21:11:32 -0700
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Newsgroups: cygnus.egcs
In article <10007280259.AA18359@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> you write:
> I suspect it is the obstacks use of ({ ... }) and ?: omitting the
> middle argument in gcc 1.35.
>
>Nope. It's an error in bc-typecd.def. Something about a float being
>promoted to double.
It is SPEC92 that contains gcc 1.35, and SPEC92 was obsoleted 5 years ago
when SPEC95 came out. Anyone who cares about SPEC only cares about SPEC2000
now. SPEC95 had gcc 2.5.3. I haven't looked at SPEC2000 yet, but I would
be surprised if it didn't have at least gcc 2.7.2.
By the way, it is SPEC95 that has the bc-typecd.def problem, not SPEC92.
The erroneous code (and yes, it is invalid code) appears within a
#ifdef __GNUC__, so it is only gcc that could possibly fail to compile this
program. And this isn't the only problem with this old code. It isn't
64-bit clean either. I had to fix several bugs to get it working on an
ia64-linux machine. None of these problems justify changing how we
develop gcc.
Jim