RE: c/4152: Incorrect code for va_arg(x,char) and va_arg(x,short) on SH

["Schirmer, Hartmut" <SchirmerH at Innovative-Systems dot de>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: sirl@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:sirl@gcc.gnu.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 10:12 AM
> To: SchirmerH@innovative-systems.de; gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org;
> gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org; nobody@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: c/4152: Incorrect code for va_arg(x,char) and
> va_arg(x,short) on SH
> 
> 
> Synopsis: Incorrect code for va_arg(x,char) and va_arg(x,short) on SH
> 
> State-Changed-From-To: open->closed
> State-Changed-By: sirl
> State-Changed-When: Tue Aug 28 01:12:22 2001
> State-Changed-Why:
>     The C code is invalid (thus the warning), please resubmit 
> (if the problem persists) with valid C, eg.
>     
>     value = (char) va_arg (m, int);
>     
> 
> http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view&pr=4152&database=gcc
> 

Thanks for your analysis.
What does 'invalid' mean in this case ?
Not covered by C89, not by C99 or not
covered by GNU-C ?

The provided code works just fine using
gcc 2.95 (x86 & SH) but fails with an
exception when compiled with gcc 3.0.1 on
SH target.

If it's invalid in a way GCC can generate a null
pointer access there should be an error, not a
warning.

I tried all combinations and only thoese with
sizeof(type) < sizeof(int) failed.

I still think gcc is wrong here. It used to
work right and still could work right.

The new warning is good.

Hartmut