From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-456804-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 18397 invoked by alias); 20 Jul 2014 12:33:16 -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 17623 invoked by uid 48); 20 Jul 2014 12:33:05 -0000
From: "maciej at opencsw dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug go/61303] gccgo: segfault, regression since 4.8.2
Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2014 12:33:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: go
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: maciej at opencsw dot org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: ian at airs dot com
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-61303-4-m7qCjq6aVa@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-61303-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-61303-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: 2014-07/txt/msg01395.txt.bz2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D61303

--- Comment #2 from Maciej Blizi=C5=84ski <maciej at opencsw dot org> ---
I've just reproduced this with gcc-4.9.1 (Solaris 10 sparc).
>>From gcc-bugs-return-456805-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Sun Jul 20 14:12:45 2014
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-456805-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 20944 invoked by alias); 20 Jul 2014 14:12:44 -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
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 20592 invoked by uid 48); 20 Jul 2014 14:12:37 -0000
From: "christopherhe at trentu dot ca" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/39134] front end does not reject sizeof on function types
Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2014 14:12:00 -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: 4.4.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: christopherhe at trentu dot ca
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: cc
Message-ID: <bug-39134-4-SRZckKYcPV@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-39134-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-39134-4@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: 2014-07/txt/msg01396.txt.bz2
Content-length: 808

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39134

Chris Hennick <christopherhe at trentu dot ca> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |christopherhe at trentu dot ca

--- Comment #2 from Chris Hennick <christopherhe at trentu dot ca> ---
Shouldn't it at least raise a warning, even using the default invocation? To
me, a positive sizeof(x) implies that x is an object that can be moved and
copied, and from what I've read, some novice programmers seem to expect that to
be true for compiled and loaded functions.

Of course, an alternative would be to actually compile/link all sizeof'd
functions in such a way that they *could* be moved and copied...