Fwd: [JAVA, PATCH] PR java/8923: ICE when modifying a variable decleared "final static"

[Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gmail dot com>]

Java patches also should be sent to java-patches@ as pre http:// 
gcc.gnu.org/lists.html.

Thanks,
Andrew Pinski

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Simon Martin <simartin@users.sourceforge.net>
> Date: July 26, 2006 11:37:12 PM PDT
> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: [JAVA, PATCH] PR java/8923: ICE when modifying a variable  
> decleared "final static"
>
> Hi all.
>
> The attached patch fixes the following test case, given in comment  
> #6, by
> checking, in the parser, that the operand to ++ or -- is not a  
> constant.
>
> === cut here ===
> class gcjbug {
>     public static void main (String [] p) {
>         System.out.println(1++);
>     }
> }
> === cut here ===
>
> The patched source tree has been successfully bootstrapped and  
> regtested on
> i686-pc-linux-gnu. Is it OK? If so, could someone commit it for me  
> (I don't
> have write access).
>
>
> I haven't figured a fix for the initial test case yet:
>
> === cut here ===
> public class myBug
> {
>         final static int myConst = 200;
>
>         public static void bug() { myConst++;   /* ICE */ }
> }
> === cut here ===
>
> A good place to emit an error would be in check-init.c(check_init),  
> because
> that's there that we get an error if myConst is not declared  
> static. From my
> investigation, it looks like we currently don't see that myConst is  
> final
> because it has been constant fold, and we get an INTEGER_CST. Is  
> there a
> way to get back to the declaration from there? I guess that adding  
> a check
> for INTEGER_CST in check_init would fix the problem, but I wonder  
> if it's a
> "good" solution...
>
> Thanks in advance for your feedback on the patch and for your  
> advice on the
> rest of the problem.
>
> Best regards,
> Simon
Index: java/parse.y
===================================================================
--- java/parse.y	(revision 115763)
+++ java/parse.y	(working copy)
@@ -14223,6 +14223,14 @@ build_incdec (int op_token, int op_locat
   /* Store the location of the operator, for better error report. The
      string of the operator will be rebuild based on the OP value. */
   EXPR_WFL_LINECOL (node) = op_location;
+
+  /* Report an error if the operand is a constant. */
+  if (TREE_CONSTANT (op1)) {
+    parse_error_context (node, "%qs cannot be used with a constant",
+                         operator_string (node));
+    return error_mark_node;
+  }
+
   return node;
 }
 
@@ -14377,7 +14385,7 @@ patch_unaryop (tree node, tree wfl_op)
 	  error_found = 1;
 	}
 
-      /* From now on, we know that op if a variable and that it has a
+      /* From now on, we know that op is a variable and that it has a
          valid wfl. We use wfl_op to locate errors related to the
          ++/-- operand. */
       if (!JNUMERIC_TYPE_P (op_type))

class pr8929
{
    public pr8929()
    {
        1++;
        1--;
    }
}

Attachment: CL_8923
Description: Text document