This is the mail archive of the gcc@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: Patch for Bug No-8081



Gabriel Dos Reis wrote,

>| Gabriel Dos Reis wrote,
>| 
>| | >  int *p = &func().val[i];
>| | 
>| | >Bleah ill-thought-out extensions...
>| | 
>| | Here the C parser takes care of semantics and emits the error.  
>| 
>| >Why an error?
>| 
>| 
>| while compiling the above statement in gcc 2.96, I get this.
>| x.c:15: invalid use of non-lvalue array
>| 
>| while compiling the above statement in gcc 3.3, I get this.
>| x.c:15: error: invalid operands to binary +
>| 
>| These are also the error messages where the return type is not 
>| variable size.  
>| Is it the desired behaviour?

>In C90, that is undefined behaviour.  In C99, it is defined behaviour
>and we should NOT error.  Therefore, I suggest that the error be
>conditionalized on the selected standard.

   I,now understood the issue. But I think this is another bug issue related
to the parser.

Regards,
Sitikant sahu  


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