[Bug c++/16568] [3.5 regression] wrong code for conditional in initializer

[bangerth at dealii dot org]

------- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org  2004-07-15 17:21 -------
Hm, I tried to construct a testcase where this uninitialized value 
would actually do harm. So I tried this: 
------------------ 
void show_address (const void *); 
 
struct ystr { 
  ystr (int) {}; 
    ystr (const ystr& y) { show_address(this); show_address(&y); }; 
}; 
 
struct C 
{ 
  C(ystr* value); 
  ystr _object; 
}; 
 
C::C(ystr* value) 
  : _object(value == 0 ? 0 : *value) 
{  
} 
------------------------ 
C::C is compiled to the same as before, i.e. we end up with an 
uninitialize value in (%esp). But then, this is ystr::ystr (const ystr&): 
------------------------ 
_ZN4ystrC1ERKS_: 
	pushl	%ebp 
	movl	%esp, %ebp 
	subl	$8, %esp 
	movl	8(%ebp), %eax 
	movl	%eax, (%esp) 
	call	_Z12show_addressPKv 
	movl	12(%ebp), %eax 
	movl	%eax, (%esp) 
	call	_Z12show_addressPKv 
	leave 
	ret 
--------------- 
Whatever used to be in %(esp) isn't used here at all, i.e. both 
the addresses of the argument as well as of *this are unaffected. 
 
Or do I miss something? Do you have a testcase where the uninitializedness 
actually hurts you? 
 
W. 
 
 

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16568