This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: High priority bug?
- To: Carlo Wood <carlo at alinoe dot com>
- Subject: Re: High priority bug?
- From: Gabriel Dos Reis <Gabriel dot Dos-Reis at cmla dot ens-cachan dot fr>
- Date: 06 Jun 2001 05:50:06 +0200
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Organization: CMLA, ENS Cachan -- CNRS UMR 8536 (France)
- References: <20010606022113.A32217@alinoe.com>
Carlo Wood <carlo@alinoe.com> writes:
| I just did ran into a weird bug, not sure if you want to fix it
| in 3.0 however. Its kinda hard to produce a short test case,
| so I'd like to first ask if this is considered a high priority
| bug before trying.
|
| The problem is as follows:
|
| In a shared library I am using the following definition:
|
| #include <limits>
| int const failure = std::numeric_limits<int>::min();
|
| And I assumed that `failure' was a _constant_
No, it is not. Or more precisely, it is not a constant integral
expression. It denotes a const object, but not a constant integral
expression: its value is dynamically computated and as such is subject
to the inter-translation unit initialization problems.
-- Gaby