* [Bug c++/15938] ICE with anonymous unions
2004-06-11 12:24 [Bug c++/15938] New: " reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2004-06-11 13:33 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-01-06 2:02 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (9 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2004-06-11 13:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-06-11 13:33 -------
Confirmed.
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed| |1
Known to fail| |2.95.3 3.0.4 3.2.2 3.2.3
| |3.3.1 3.5.0 3.4.0
Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2004-06-11 13:33:16
date| |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15938
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread* [Bug c++/15938] ICE with anonymous unions
2004-06-11 12:24 [Bug c++/15938] New: " reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-06-11 13:33 ` [Bug c++/15938] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-01-06 2:02 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-03-20 20:13 ` pcarlini at suse dot de
` (8 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-01-06 2:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords| |error-recovery
Last reconfirmed|2004-06-11 13:33:16 |2005-01-06 02:02:15
date| |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15938
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread* [Bug c++/15938] ICE with anonymous unions
2004-06-11 12:24 [Bug c++/15938] New: " reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-06-11 13:33 ` [Bug c++/15938] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-01-06 2:02 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-03-20 20:13 ` pcarlini at suse dot de
2005-07-20 13:46 ` reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: pcarlini at suse dot de @ 2005-03-20 20:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-03-20 20:13 -------
Seenms doable...
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |pcarlini at suse dot de
|dot org |
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15938
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread* [Bug c++/15938] ICE with anonymous unions
2004-06-11 12:24 [Bug c++/15938] New: " reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2005-03-20 20:13 ` pcarlini at suse dot de
@ 2005-07-20 13:46 ` reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-07-21 2:08 ` giovannibajo at libero dot it
` (6 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-07-20 13:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-20 13:17 -------
On mainline the code is accepted since today.
This is probably due to Giovanni's patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2005-07/msg00718.html
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |giovannibajo at gcc dot gnu
| |dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15938
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread* [Bug c++/15938] ICE with anonymous unions
2004-06-11 12:24 [Bug c++/15938] New: " reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2005-07-20 13:46 ` reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-07-21 2:08 ` giovannibajo at libero dot it
2005-07-21 2:53 ` gdr at integrable-solutions dot net
` (5 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: giovannibajo at libero dot it @ 2005-07-21 2:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-07-21 01:51 -------
Yes, it's because of my patch.
I would like to know if we agree that the code is invalid or not. It's a bit
hard to have a definitive answer since it is GNU C++ (uses an extension), but
given that the C frontend accepts it, I don't see why we should reject it. In
which case, this bug can be closed as fixed.
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org,
| |nathan at gcc dot gnu dot
| |org
AssignedTo|pcarlini at suse dot de |giovannibajo at libero dot
| |it
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15938
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread* [Bug c++/15938] ICE with anonymous unions
2004-06-11 12:24 [Bug c++/15938] New: " reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2005-07-21 2:08 ` giovannibajo at libero dot it
@ 2005-07-21 2:53 ` gdr at integrable-solutions dot net
2005-07-21 13:23 ` giovannibajo at libero dot it
` (4 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: gdr at integrable-solutions dot net @ 2005-07-21 2:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From gdr at integrable-solutions dot net 2005-07-21 02:35 -------
Subject: Re: ICE with anonymous unions
"giovannibajo at libero dot it" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> writes:
| Yes, it's because of my patch.
|
| I would like to know if we agree that the code is invalid or not. It's a bit
| hard to have a definitive answer since it is GNU C++ (uses an extension), but
| given that the C frontend accepts it, I don't see why we should reject it. In
| which case, this bug can be closed as fixed.
[I will address the validity issue as far as GNU C++ is concerned ]
Clearly, this being invalid according to ISO C++ and accepted by the C
front-end (with appropriate diagnostic), the only question that
remains is whether this is valid C++
typedef union {
struct unique_name_1 { int i; };
struct unique_name_2 { char c; };
} A;
The answer is yes. Now, the remaning thing is apply the name
restrictions as for unnamed unions.
Thanks,
-- Gaby
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15938
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread* [Bug c++/15938] ICE with anonymous unions
2004-06-11 12:24 [Bug c++/15938] New: " reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2005-07-21 2:53 ` gdr at integrable-solutions dot net
@ 2005-07-21 13:23 ` giovannibajo at libero dot it
2005-07-21 15:12 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: giovannibajo at libero dot it @ 2005-07-21 13:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-07-21 13:18 -------
=================================================
typedef union
{
struct { int i; };
struct { char c; };
} A;
A a = { 0 };
A b = {{ 0 }};
A c = {{{ 0 }}}; // { dg-error "braces" }
=================================================
pr15938.cc:9: error: braces around scalar initializer for type 'int'
I believe everything is correct.
Volker, would you mind committing this testcase and closing this bug?
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15938
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread* [Bug c++/15938] ICE with anonymous unions
2004-06-11 12:24 [Bug c++/15938] New: " reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2005-07-21 13:23 ` giovannibajo at libero dot it
@ 2005-07-21 15:12 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-07-21 15:15 ` reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-07-21 15:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-21 14:50 -------
Subject: Bug 15938
CVSROOT: /cvs/gcc
Module name: gcc
Changes by: reichelt@gcc.gnu.org 2005-07-21 14:50:47
Modified files:
gcc/testsuite : ChangeLog
Added files:
gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/init: union2.C
Log message:
PR c++/15938
* g++.dg/init/union2.C: New test.
Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.5795&r2=1.5796
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/init/union2.C.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=NONE&r2=1.1
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15938
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread* [Bug c++/15938] ICE with anonymous unions
2004-06-11 12:24 [Bug c++/15938] New: " reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2005-07-21 15:12 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-07-21 15:15 ` reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-07-21 15:56 ` giovannibajo at libero dot it
2005-07-23 5:03 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
10 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-07-21 15:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-21 15:12 -------
The ICE is fixed now. But maybe some additional code cleanup is needed:\x13
Giovanni, what about the following code snippet from typeck2.c?
Is the comment still valid? What about the error message, is it
still triggered in some cases?
/* Find the first named field. ANSI decided in September 1990
that only named fields count here. */
tree field = TYPE_FIELDS (type);
while (field && (!DECL_NAME (field) || TREE_CODE (field) != FIELD_DECL))
field = TREE_CHAIN (field);
if (!field)
{
error ("union %qT with no named members cannot be initialized",
type);
ce->value = error_mark_node;
}
ce->index = field;
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15938
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread* [Bug c++/15938] ICE with anonymous unions
2004-06-11 12:24 [Bug c++/15938] New: " reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2005-07-21 15:15 ` reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2005-07-21 15:56 ` giovannibajo at libero dot it
2005-07-23 5:03 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
10 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: giovannibajo at libero dot it @ 2005-07-21 15:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-07-21 15:32 -------
It might indeed be obsolete code: I don't think you can currently create an
union (or a record) with only unnamed fields. If you want to purse this
further, you could regtest changing this:
if (!field)
{
error ("union %qT with no named members cannot be initialized",
type);
ce->value = error_mark_node;
}
with "gcc_assert (field);". Which will probably succeed, as there are no
occurrences of this error message in my last g++.log.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15938
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread* [Bug c++/15938] ICE with anonymous unions
2004-06-11 12:24 [Bug c++/15938] New: " reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2005-07-21 15:56 ` giovannibajo at libero dot it
@ 2005-07-23 5:03 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
10 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-07-23 5:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Severity|normal |minor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15938
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread