public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "sparc64 at rediffmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/28581] Illegal loading the address of a label with -O2
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2007 07:25:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071118072533.8307.qmail@sourceware.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-28581-5993@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>



------- Comment #8 from sparc64 at rediffmail dot com  2007-11-18 07:25 -------
Ok, Continued :

The "goto" statement works fine with optimization unless that "goto" is
needless (like "goto" to next C statement) in which case, usage of "labels" as
addresses in other places (like printf) takes a beating.

The compiler is refusing to see the usage of labels as addresses in other
places than "goto"s.  I think you call this "design". But one cant expect the
code to produce different results with "optimization" enabled. This is against
the definition of "optimization".

It would be nice if you could include a fix for this. It even helps writing
"self-modifying" code, you see. (apart from "goto"s). In fact that is when I
hit this problem.

Ofcourse, self-modifying code has other architectural limitations (like harvard
cache structure etc..). But it is upto the programmer to over-come it.

So, I would really appreciate if you can get this fixed in a future "gcc"
release.

Thank you


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28581


  parent reply	other threads:[~2007-11-18  7:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-08-03  6:03 [Bug c/28581] New: " inaoka dot kazuhiro at renesas dot com
2006-08-03  6:07 ` [Bug c/28581] " inaoka dot kazuhiro at renesas dot com
2006-08-03 11:45 ` [Bug middle-end/28581] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2006-08-08  0:33 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-16 19:58 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-17 11:50 ` sparc64 at rediffmail dot com
2007-11-17 20:36 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-18  6:41 ` sparc64 at rediffmail dot com
2007-11-18  7:25 ` sparc64 at rediffmail dot com [this message]
2007-11-18  7:28 ` sparc64 at rediffmail dot com
2007-11-18  8:46 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-18 14:44 ` sparc64 at rediffmail dot com
2007-11-18 16:05 ` steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
     [not found] <bug-28581-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2021-07-21 16:15 ` schwab@linux-m68k.org
2024-03-16 18:09 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20071118072533.8307.qmail@sourceware.org \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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).