[Bug c++/24222] New: -fsyntax-only runs the gimplifier

[Bug c++/24222] New: -fsyntax-only runs the gimplifier

[sabre at nondot dot org]

Compiling a C++ file with -fsyntax-only -ftime-report includes time spent on
'tree gimplify'.  Unless I'm missing something, -fsyntax-only shouldn't have to
gimplify anything.

-Chris


-- 
           Summary: -fsyntax-only runs the gimplifier
           Product: gcc
           Version: unknown
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: c++
        AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
        ReportedBy: sabre at nondot dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24222

[Bug c++/24222] -fsyntax-only runs the gimplifier

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-10-06 01:30 -------
This needed for some syntaxical analysis, IIRC.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24222

[Bug c++/24222] -fsyntax-only runs the gimplifier

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-10-06 01:37 -------
The following explains about the C compiler:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-05/msg00257.html

It is semantical analysis and not syntax.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24222

[Bug c++/24222] -fsyntax-only runs the gimplifier

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-10-06 01:42 -------
right now if we don't gimplify with -fsyntax-only, we would not be able to
diagnostic the following:
void f(void)
{
  break;
}


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24222

[Bug c++/24222] The gimplifier shouldn't emit warnings or errors

[sabre at nondot dot org]

------- Comment #4 from sabre at nondot dot org  2005-10-06 01:51 -------
The gimplifier apparently emits these three errors:

error ("memory input %d is not directly addressable", i);
error ("invalid lvalue in asm output %d", i);
error ("too few arguments to function %<va_start%>");

In an ideal, modular, world, the front-ends should be emitting these.  If these
checks need to be shared across different front-ends, the checks could be
function calls in c-common, not be put into the gimplifier.

One immediate advantage would be that -fsyntax-only wouldn't need to run the
gimplifier.

-Chris


-- 

sabre at nondot dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Summary|-fsyntax-only runs the      |The gimplifier shouldn't
                   |gimplifier                  |emit warnings or errors


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24222

[Bug c++/24222] The gimplifier shouldn't emit warnings or errors

[gdr at integrable-solutions dot net]

------- Comment #5 from gdr at integrable-solutions dot net  2005-10-06 20:56 -------
Subject: Re:  -fsyntax-only runs the gimplifier

"pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> writes:

| right now if we don't gimplify with -fsyntax-only, we would not be able to
| diagnostic the following:
| void f(void)
| {
|   break;
| }

That is one more reason why it is a bug in the compiler.

-- Gaby


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24222

[Bug c++/24222] The gimplifier shouldn't emit warnings or errors

[gdr at integrable-solutions dot net]

------- Comment #6 from gdr at integrable-solutions dot net  2005-10-06 20:57 -------
Subject: Re:   New: -fsyntax-only runs the gimplifier

"sabre at nondot dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> writes:

| Compiling a C++ file with -fsyntax-only -ftime-report includes time spent on
| 'tree gimplify'.  Unless I'm missing something, -fsyntax-only
| shouldn't have to gimplify anything.

I strongly agree that that is a bug in the way the compiler currently works.

-- Gaby


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24222

[Bug c++/24222] The gimplifier shouldn't emit warnings or errors

[gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #7 from gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-12-04 05:17 -------
(In reply to comment #3)
> right now if we don't gimplify with -fsyntax-only, we would not be able to
> diagnostic the following:
> void f(void)
> {
>   break;
> }

If that is true, then it should be considered a bug in the C++ front-end. 


-- 

gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24222

[Bug c++/24222] [meta-bug] The gimplifier shouldn't emit warnings or errors

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-03-18 16:26 -------
I am going to seperate this into a couple of different bugs.


-- 

pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
     Ever Confirmed|0                           |1
   Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00         |2006-03-18 16:26:58
               date|                            |
            Summary|The gimplifier shouldn't    |[meta-bug] The gimplifier
                   |emit warnings or errors     |shouldn't emit warnings or
                   |                            |errors


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24222

[Bug middle-end/24222] [meta-bug] The gimplifier shouldn't emit warnings or errors

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-03-18 16:39 -------
I found some other ones which had been added after this bug report was open :(.


-- 

pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
                   |                            |org
          Component|c++                         |middle-end


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24222