public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug c++/21487] New: new object affectation in a switch
@ 2005-05-10 12:33 sebmaestro at hotmail dot com
2005-05-10 13:12 ` [Bug c++/21487] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: sebmaestro at hotmail dot com @ 2005-05-10 12:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2458 bytes --]
what follows (version, command line, source and .ii) seems to be a bug.
if you need something else -> sebmaestro@hotmail.com.
"bravo et merci quand même pour votre bon boulot !"
seb.
------ Command lines : ---------
seb$ g++ --version
g++ (GCC) 3.3.6 (Debian 1:3.3.6-4)
Copyright (C) 2003 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
Ce logiciel est libre; voir les sources pour les conditions de copie. Il n'y a PAS
GARANTIE; ni implicite pour le MARCHANDAGE ou pour un BUT PARTICULIER.
seb$ g++ -Wall -save-temps -o test makebug.cpp
makebug.cpp: Dans function « int main(int, char**) »:
makebug.cpp:42: error: saut à l'étiquette du « case »
makebug.cpp:40: error: crosses initialization of `Thing*str'
makebug.cpp:44: error: saut à l'étiquette du « case »
makebug.cpp:40: error: crosses initialization of `Thing*str'
makebug.cpp:40: attention : unused variable `Thing*str'
---------- source code: (makebug.cpp) -----------
class Thing {
public:
Thing() {
}
};
int main (int argc, char ** argv){
if (argc == 1) {
return 0;
}
int truc = 0;
switch (truc) {
case 0:
break;
case 1:
Thing *th;
th = new Thing();
break;
case 2:
break;
case 3:
break;
}
switch (truc) {
case 0:
break;
case 1:
Thing *str = new Thing;
break;
case 2:
break;
case 3:
break;
}
return 0;
}
------------ preprocessed file: (makebug.ii) -----------
# 1 "makebug.cpp"
# 1 "<interne>"
# 1 "<ligne de commande>"
# 1 "makebug.cpp"
class Thing {
public:
Thing() {
}
};
int main (int argc, char ** argv){
if (argc == 1) {
return 0;
}
int truc = 0;
switch (truc) {
case 0:
break;
case 1:
Thing *th;
th = new Thing();
break;
case 2:
break;
case 3:
break;
}
switch (truc) {
case 0:
break;
case 1:
Thing *str = new Thing;
break;
case 2:
break;
case 3:
break;
}
return 0;
}
--
Summary: new object affectation in a switch
Product: gcc
Version: 3.3.6
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: sebmaestro at hotmail dot com
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org,sebmaestro at hotmail
dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21487
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/21487] new object affectation in a switch
2005-05-10 12:33 [Bug c++/21487] New: new object affectation in a switch sebmaestro at hotmail dot com
@ 2005-05-10 13:12 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-05-10 14:37 ` sebmaestro at hotmail dot com
2005-05-10 14:51 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-05-10 13:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10 13:12 -------
This is how C++ works, you can actually fall through case statements. This is invalid code and G++
rejects it correctly.
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |INVALID
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21487
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/21487] new object affectation in a switch
2005-05-10 12:33 [Bug c++/21487] New: new object affectation in a switch sebmaestro at hotmail dot com
2005-05-10 13:12 ` [Bug c++/21487] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-05-10 14:37 ` sebmaestro at hotmail dot com
2005-05-10 14:51 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: sebmaestro at hotmail dot com @ 2005-05-10 14:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From sebmaestro at hotmail dot com 2005-05-10 14:37 -------
Subject: RE: new object affectation in a switch
So, I don't understand why :
switch (truc) {
case 0:
break;
case 1:
Thing *th;
th = new Thing();
break;
case 2:
break;
case 3:
break;
}
is OK for g++.
switch (truc) {
case 0:
break;
case 1:
break;
case 2:
break;
case 3:
Thing *th = new Thing;
break;
}
is "correct" too, but
switch (truc) {
case 0:
break;
case 1:
Thing *th = new Thing;
break;
case 2:
break;
case 3:
break;
}
is rejected with a french and english (:-D) error message !
>From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
>Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org
>To: sebmaestro@hotmail.com
>Subject: [Bug c++/21487] new object affectation in a switch
>Date: 10 May 2005 13:12:47 -0000
>
>------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10
>13:12 -------
>This is how C++ works, you can actually fall through case statements. This
>is invalid code and G++
>rejects it correctly.
>
>--
> What |Removed |Added
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
> Resolution| |INVALID
>
>
>http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21487
>
>------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
>You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter.
>You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21487
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/21487] new object affectation in a switch
2005-05-10 12:33 [Bug c++/21487] New: new object affectation in a switch sebmaestro at hotmail dot com
2005-05-10 13:12 ` [Bug c++/21487] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-05-10 14:37 ` sebmaestro at hotmail dot com
@ 2005-05-10 14:51 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-05-10 14:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-10 14:51 -------
(In reply to comment #2)
> Subject: RE: new object affectation in a switch
>
> So, I don't understand why :
...
> is OK for g++.
Because there is no initialization of a variable in the declaration.
....
> is "correct" too, but
because there is no case statement after the initialization of the variable so there is no way to cross the
initialization.
> is rejected with a french and english (:-D) error message !
Because you cross an initialization.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21487
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2005-05-10 14:51 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2005-05-10 12:33 [Bug c++/21487] New: new object affectation in a switch sebmaestro at hotmail dot com
2005-05-10 13:12 ` [Bug c++/21487] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-05-10 14:37 ` sebmaestro at hotmail dot com
2005-05-10 14:51 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).