[Bug c/68075] New: Printf is changing the order of values

[Bug c/68075] New: Printf is changing the order of values

[girish.elchuri at smuuthsolutions dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68075

            Bug ID: 68075
           Summary: Printf is changing the order of values
           Product: gcc
           Version: unknown
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: critical
          Priority: P3
         Component: c
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: girish.elchuri at smuuthsolutions dot com
  Target Milestone: ---

Created attachment 36571
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36571&action=edit
Code that is producing the wrong output.

Look at the following code segment attached herewith. This is giving the
output:

>><<, NULL
>><<, NULL
>><<, NULL
>>ghi<<, 'ghi'
>>def<<, 'def'
>>abc<<, 'abc'
'abc', 'abc', 'abc', 'abc', 'abc', 'abc'


While th expected output is:
>>abc<<, 'abc'
>>def<<, 'def
>>ghi<<, 'ghi'
>><<, NULL
>><<, NULL
>><<, NULL
'abc', 'def', 'ghi', NULL, NULL, NULL

This is a real bug, please fix it.

[Bug c/68075] Printf is changing the order of values

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68075

Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |INVALID

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The order of the get_db_insert_string function calls in
        printf ("%s, %s, %s, %s, %s, %s\n",
                        get_db_insert_string (db_val, &val[0][0]),
                        get_db_insert_string (db_val, &val[1][0]),
                        get_db_insert_string (db_val, &val[2][0]),
                        get_db_insert_string (db_val, &val[3][0]),
                        get_db_insert_string (db_val, &val[4][0]),
                        get_db_insert_string (db_val, &val[5][0]));

is not specified in C.  So both answers are correct and your expectations for
the order of the function calls is incorrect.