[Bug c/5675] [4.0 regression] const variables wrongly considered part of constant expressions

[Bug c/5675] [4.0 regression] const variables wrongly considered part of constant expressions

[ian at airs dot com]

------- Additional Comments From ian at airs dot com  2005-01-13 02:34 -------
Just a note that reverting this patch:
    http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-02/msg01334.html
fixes this regression.  Reverting that patch

Jan said that his patch did not change the results of the test, so presumably
something else changed somewhere.

Reverting that patch removes most of the warnings from c90-const-expr-3.c and
c99-const-expr-3.c, although we still get warnings for +0.0, 0.0+0.0, and
(double)0.0.

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |ian at airs dot com


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5675

[Bug c/5675] [4.0 regression] const variables wrongly considered part of constant expressions

[ian at airs dot com]

------- Additional Comments From ian at airs dot com  2005-01-13 15:16 -------
Partial patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-01/msg00725.html

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5675

[Bug c/5675] [4.0 regression] const variables wrongly considered part of constant expressions

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-01-17 18:54 -------
Subject: Bug 5675

CVSROOT:	/cvs/gcc
Module name:	gcc
Changes by:	ian@gcc.gnu.org	2005-01-17 18:54:21

Modified files:
	gcc            : ChangeLog c-typeck.c 

Log message:
	PR c/5675
	* c-typeck.c (build_c_cast): Revert patch of 2003-02-16: don't
	fold constant variables into initial values.

Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=2.7155&r2=2.7156
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/c-typeck.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.407&r2=1.408



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5675

[Bug c/5675] [4.0 regression] const variables wrongly considered part of constant expressions

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-01-17 18:56 -------
Subject: Bug 5675

CVSROOT:	/cvs/gcc
Module name:	gcc
Changes by:	ian@gcc.gnu.org	2005-01-17 18:55:57

Modified files:
	gcc/testsuite  : ChangeLog 
	gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg: c90-const-expr-3.c c99-const-expr-3.c 

Log message:
	PR c/5675
	* gcc.dg/c90-const-expr-3.c: Remove xfails on tests which now
	pass--those that refer just to the variable, possibly with a
	cast.
	* gcc.dg/c99-const-expr-3.c: Likewise.

Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.4897&r2=1.4898
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/c90-const-expr-3.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.5&r2=1.6
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/c99-const-expr-3.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.4&r2=1.5



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5675

[Bug c/5675] const variables wrongly considered part of constant expressions

[ian at airs dot com]

------- Additional Comments From ian at airs dot com  2005-01-17 18:57 -------
This bug is not fixed, but the 4.0 regression has been fixed.  4.0 now fails in
the same way as earlier gcc versions.

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Summary|[4.0 regression] const      |const variables wrongly
                   |variables wrongly considered|considered part of constant
                   |part of constant expressions|expressions


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5675

[Bug c/5675] const variables wrongly considered part of constant expressions

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Target Milestone|4.0.0                       |---


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5675

[Bug c/5675] const variables wrongly considered part of constant expressions

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
                   |                            |org
   Last reconfirmed|2004-12-05 04:31:32         |2005-04-25 02:08:58
               date|                            |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5675

[Bug c/5675] const variables wrongly considered part of constant expressions (gcc.dg/c9[09]-const-expr-3.c)

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-06-30 13:31 -------
Adding "gcc.dg/c9[09]-const-expr-3.c" to the summary so I don't get confused between this bug and 
PR 456.

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Summary|const variables wrongly     |const variables wrongly
                   |considered part of constant |considered part of constant
                   |expressions                 |expressions (gcc.dg/c9[09]-
                   |                            |const-expr-3.c)


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5675

[Bug c/5675] const variables wrongly considered part of constant expressions

[jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
OtherBugsDependingO|                            |16989
              nThis|                            |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5675

[Bug c/5675] const variables wrongly considered part of constant expressions

[jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org  2004-08-11 20:50 -------
Semi-formal model of constant expressions proposed for discussion:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-08/msg00377.html
(with informal documentation of the extensions in GNU C).

Note that some cases additional to those failing when this bug was reported
started failing around 24 March.

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-regression/2004-03/msg00022.html


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5675

[Bug c/5675] const variables wrongly considered part of constant expressions

[pinskia@physics.uc.edu]

PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5675


pinskia@physics.uc.edu changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
     Ever Confirmed|                            |1
   Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00         |2003-05-27 14:38:13
               date|                            |


------- Additional Comments From pinskia@physics.uc.edu  2003-05-27 14:38 -------
See Dara's comment.



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Bug c/5675] const variables wrongly considered part of constant expressions

[dhazeghi@yahoo.com]

PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5675



------- Additional Comments From dhazeghi@yahoo.com  2003-05-27 05:09 -------
Hello,

This bug is confirmed to still exist on gcc 3.3 branch and mainline (20030525).

Dara



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.