[PATCH] Fix uninitialized src_range within c_expr (Re: libcpp/C FE source range patch committed (r230331))

David Malcolm dmalcolm@redhat.com
Tue Nov 17 20:12:00 GMT 2015


On Tue, 2015-11-17 at 16:24 +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 11/17/2015 04:13 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > On Mon, 2015-11-16 at 22:34 +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> >>
> >> Should c_expr perhaps acquire a constructor so that this problem is
> >> avoided in the future? The whole thing seems somewhat error-prone.
> >
> > I agree that it's error prone, and the ctor approach is what I've been
> > trying for the C++ FE [1] but I suspect that touching that in the C FE
> > would be a much more invasive patch (unless we simply give it a default
> > ctor that makes the src_range be a pair of UNKNOWN_LOCATIONS?).
> 
> The UNKNOWN_LOCATIONS pair would have been my approach, yes.
> 
> > This case gains a pair of locals: start_loc and end_loc (so that we can
> > track the spelling range whilst retaining the "loc" used for the caret),
> > and I preferred to confine their scope to within the case, hence the
> > extra braced block.  Omitting the braced block leads to:
> > ../../src/gcc/c/c-parser.c:7494:7: error: jump to case label [-fpermissive]
> >    case RID_OFFSETOF:
> >         ^
> > ../../src/gcc/c/c-parser.c:7472:17: error:   crosses initialization of ‘location_t end_loc’
> >        location_t end_loc = c_parser_peek_token (parser)->get_finish ();
> >                   ^
> > etc.
> 
> Hmm, odd, I tried placing just the location_t start_loc line into the 
> switch and that appeared to compile fine. But I guess this is not a huge 
> problem.
> >
> > Is the combination of the 3 patches OK for trunk? (assuming
> > bootstrap®rest; it's only the braced-init tweak that hasn't been).
> 
> Yes.

Thanks.  I've committed the 3 patches to trunk as r230497, which should
fix the worst of the regressions caused by r230331 seen on AIX.  I'll
continue to investigate as per the discussion above.




More information about the Gcc-patches mailing list