[Bug preprocessor/14438] [3.3/3.4/3.5 Regression] -E of #pragma has negative line number

[reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org  2004-03-20 21:17 -------
Alexandre, I tested your suggestion on 3.3 branch, 3.4 branch and mainline.

It cured the problem of the submitter with
  #pragma GCC poison foo

It also cured the problem for standard header files that contain
  #pragma GCC system_header
For example, preprocessing the C++ header
  #include<list>
without your patch resulted in

  # 1 "PR14438A.cc"
  # 1 "<built-in>"
  # 1 "<command line>"
  # 1 "PR14438A.cc"
  # 1
"/mygcc/bin/../lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/3.4.0/../../../../include/c++/3.4.0/list"
1 3
  # 64
"/mygcc/bin/../lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/3.4.0/../../../../include/c++/3.4.0/list"
3

  # 65
"/mygcc/bin/../lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/3.4.0/../../../../include/c++/3.4.0/list"
3
  # 4294967211
"/mygcc/bin/../lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/3.4.0/../../../../include/c++/3.4.0/list"
3
    ^^^^^^^^^^

Alas, I couldn't do regression testing, since my DejaGnu seems to be out
of date. Maybe it's some different problem, but right know I don't have
the time to hunt the problem down.

Since it's your patch, anyway, could you please do that and get it reviewed?
(I'll attach the patches to the PR, one for the 3.3 and 3.4 branch and one
for mainline - which differs only in whitespace.)

Btw, I don't have the slightest idea to how to prepare a test for this kind
of problem for the testsuite. Any ideas?


-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|                            |patch


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14438