This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug c++/22434] [3.4/4.0/4.1 regression] ICE in simplify_{,gen_}subreg
- 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: 12 Jul 2005 12:32:10 -0000
- Subject: [Bug c++/22434] [3.4/4.0/4.1 regression] ICE in simplify_{,gen_}subreg
- References: <20050712102918.22434.jakub@redhat.com>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Additional Comments From reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-12 12:32 -------
Confirmed. Reduced testcase:
=================================
struct A
{
A(void*);
~A();
};
void foo(const int i, bool b)
{
b ? A(0) : i;
}
=================================
Without "-pedantic" we get an ICE (since gcc 3.4.0)
PR22434.cc: In function 'void foo(int, bool)':
PR22434.cc:9: internal compiler error: in simplify_subreg, at
simplify-rtx.c:3765
Please submit a full bug report, [etc.]
With -pedantic the code is rejected (since gcc 3.4.0).
It was rejected unconditionally before gcc 3.4.0.
The code is also rejected if one removes the const qualifier from "i".
So maybe we should switch back to the original behavior?
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot
| |org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed| |1
Keywords| |ice-on-invalid-code
Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-07-12 12:32:03
date| |
Summary|ICE in |[3.4/4.0/4.1 regression] ICE
|simplify_{,gen_}subreg |in simplify_{,gen_}subreg
Target Milestone|--- |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22434