This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug c++/6994] [3.4 regression] ICE in find_function_data
- From: "reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 26 Sep 2003 08:25:30 -0000
- Subject: [Bug c++/6994] [3.4 regression] ICE in find_function_data
- References: <20020611082602.6994.schwab@suse.de>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6994
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |rth at redhat dot com
Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED
Priority|P3 |P1
Resolution|FIXED |
Summary|ICE in find_function_data |[3.4 regression] ICE in
| |find_function_data
Target Milestone|--- |3.4
Version|3.1.1 |3.4
------- Additional Comments From reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2003-09-26 08:24 -------
Richard's patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2003-09/msg00666.html
makes the testcase testsuite/g++.dg/ext/vla1.C fail again,
but the underlying problem is a deeper one, according to him
(excerpt from a private mail from Richard):
| My patch merely exposed a previous problem via segv.
|
| It *should* have been failing before. I don't know why it wasn't.
| Note that by reverting my change, you get no error on line 12.
|
| The trees being produced by the c++ front end in this case are
| completely bogus. It is mere accident that the bogus trees were
| being remapped to error_mark_node, and thus silently ignored by
| the middle-end.
|
| The front end should be generating an error message and forcing
| error_mark_node there.