From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-423689-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 27979 invoked by alias); 3 Jun 2013 07:34:14 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 27943 invoked by uid 48); 3 Jun 2013 07:34:10 -0000
From: "asmwarrior at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug libstdc++/53477] pretty printer fails with: Python Exception <type 'exceptions.IndexError'> list index out of range
Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2013 07:34:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: libstdc++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.7.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: asmwarrior at gmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-53477-4-OnCwkFaLKb@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-53477-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-53477-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2013-06/txt/msg00068.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53477

--- Comment #7 from asmwarrior <asmwarrior at gmail dot com> ---
Ok, I found another issue on the line "return 0", see the GDB log:

[debug]> p m
[debug]$2 = std::map with 1 elements = {[3] = std::set with 2 elements = {[0] =
5, [1] = 6}}
[debug]>>>>>>cb_gdb:
[debug]> p m[3]
[debug]Attempt to take address of value not located in memory.
[debug]>>>>>>cb_gdb:

"p m" shows the correct value, but I'm not sure why "p m[3]" failed? Is it a
GDB bug?