public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug c++/23643] New: Incorrect conversion from derived to empty base class
@ 2005-08-30 20:16 bduong at progress dot com
2005-08-30 20:28 ` [Bug c++/23643] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: bduong at progress dot com @ 2005-08-30 20:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
It appears that the implicit conversion from a derived to an empty base class
is incorrect.
Consider the following code:
empty.cc:
#include <stdio.h>
class simple_base {
public:
int sb;
};
class empty_base {
public:
void test_eb() {
printf("empty_base this @ %p\n", this);
}
};
class class1 : public simple_base, public empty_base {
public:
int c1;
void test(empty_base* p) {
printf("empty_base @ %p\n", p);
}
};
class class2 {
public:
int c2;
class1 c1;
int i3;
void test(class1* p) {
printf("class1 @ %p, i3 @ %p\n", p, &i3);
c1.test(p);
printf("empty_base should be at %p\n", (char*)p +
sizeof(simple_base));
c1.test_eb();
}
};
int main (int argc, char * const argv[]) {
class2 c2;
printf("class2 @ %p\n", &c2);
c2.test(&c2.c1);
return 0;
}
compiling this using:
g++ empty.cc and executing results in:
class2 @ 0xbfffce50
class1 @ 0xbfffce54, i3 @ 0xbfffce5c
empty_base @ 0xbfffce54
empty_base should be at 0xbfffce58
empty_base this @ 0xbfffce54
I would have expected the output to be:
class2 @ 0xbfffce50
class1 @ 0xbfffce54, i3 @ 0xbfffce5c
empty_base @ 0xbfffce58
empty_base should be at 0xbfffce58
empty_base this @ 0xbfffce58
version of gcc:
Reading specs from /usr/lib/gcc-lib/i386-redhat-linux/3.2.3/specs
Configured with: ../configure --prefix=/usr --mandir=/usr/share/man
--infodir=/usr/share/info --enable-shared --enable-threads=posix
--disable-checking --with-system-zlib --enable-__cxa_atexit --host=i386-redhat-linux
Thread model: posix
gcc version 3.2.3 20030502 (Red Hat Linux 3.2.3-52)
Thanks,
Bao.
--
Summary: Incorrect conversion from derived to empty base class
Product: gcc
Version: 3.2.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: bduong at progress dot com
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23643
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/23643] Incorrect conversion from derived to empty base class
2005-08-30 20:16 [Bug c++/23643] New: Incorrect conversion from derived to empty base class bduong at progress dot com
@ 2005-08-30 20:28 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-08-30 20:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-30 20:21 -------
Someone will have to look this up in the ABI since this is an ABI issue.
But I think is okay as the base class is empty and takes no space at all.
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords| |ABI
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23643
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/23643] Incorrect conversion from derived to empty base class
[not found] <bug-23643-11269@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2006-10-12 0:56 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
@ 2007-01-12 8:18 ` jbuck at gcc dot gnu dot org
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: jbuck at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2007-01-12 8:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #3 from jbuck at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-12 08:18 -------
Andrew is right, this isn't a bug, and is in fact required by the ABI.
See http://www.codesourcery.com/cxx-abi/abi.html#class-types, section II,
subsection 3. "First, attempt to place D at offset 0." No rule prevents doing
this, so that is where it lands.
--
jbuck at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution| |INVALID
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23643
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/23643] Incorrect conversion from derived to empty base class
[not found] <bug-23643-11269@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
@ 2006-10-12 0:56 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
2007-01-12 8:18 ` jbuck at gcc dot gnu dot org
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: bangerth at dealii dot org @ 2006-10-12 0:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #2 from bangerth at dealii dot org 2006-10-12 00:56 -------
Why exactly do you think that the empty base should not be located at
the same address as the simple_base base object?
W.
--
bangerth at dealii dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |bangerth at dealii dot org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23643
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2007-01-12 8:18 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2005-08-30 20:16 [Bug c++/23643] New: Incorrect conversion from derived to empty base class bduong at progress dot com
2005-08-30 20:28 ` [Bug c++/23643] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
[not found] <bug-23643-11269@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2006-10-12 0:56 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
2007-01-12 8:18 ` jbuck 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).