This is the mail archive of the 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: crash fix for unhanded operation

On Sep 9, 2013, at 3:48 PM, "Joseph S. Myers" <> wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Sep 2013, Mike Stump wrote:
>> Presently gcc just dies with a crash for an unhanded operation, the 
>> below handles it better.
>> I'm torn between sorry and error, error might be better.  Thoughts?
> error means there is something wrong with the user's source code,

Right.  If one has mode X, and there are no instructions for mode X, the thing that is wrong with their source code is wanting to perform an operation in mode X.  The language standard doesn't mandate that the operation for mode X works, so, we are free to just give an error.

> should generally be associated with the location of an erroneous source 
> code construct.

Indeed, the ^ points to exactly what is wrong in their source, which is (relatively new and) nice.

> I don't see how it can be appropriate here; my impression 
> is that this code should never fail for any compiler input,

Your impression is wrong.  It does indeed fail.

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