From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27813 invoked by alias); 19 Feb 2014 20:32:15 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 27779 invoked by uid 48); 19 Feb 2014 20:32:10 -0000 From: "daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/60273] gcc gets confused when one class uses variadic Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 20:32:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: c++ X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.8.1 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: daniel.kruegler at googlemail 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: cc Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2014-02/txt/msg02019.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D60273 Daniel Kr=C3=BCgler changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |daniel.kruegler@googlemail. | |com --- Comment #1 from Daniel Kr=C3=BCgler --- My understanding is that your example is touching an open language issue, namely http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_active.html#1430 The current tendency seems to be that this should be ill-formed (personally= I'm not happy with that decision). Current clang and gcc do both reject your co= de. I suggest to mark this issue as deferred pending 1430. >>From gcc-bugs-return-444263-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Wed Feb 19 20:36:45 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 30232 invoked by alias); 19 Feb 2014 20:36:45 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 30172 invoked by uid 48); 19 Feb 2014 20:36:41 -0000 From: "warnerme at ptd dot net" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c/59933] for loop goes wild with assert() enabled Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 20:36:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: c X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.8.2 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: major X-Bugzilla-Who: warnerme at ptd dot net X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED 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: In-Reply-To: References: 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: 2014-02/txt/msg02020.txt.bz2 Content-length: 347 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59933 --- Comment #11 from Mark Warner --- I'm confused .. what about.. for (k = i; k < (int)(sizeof(NSQ_del_dec_struct) / sizeof(opus_int32)); ++k) ... is illegal or invalid ? Why does it only fail if -DDEBUG is defined ? I mean, this code worked fine for months .. and now