From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-prs-return-22929-listarch-gcc-prs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 30842 invoked by alias); 14 Oct 2002 06:36:02 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-prs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 30812 invoked by uid 71); 14 Oct 2002 06:36:02 -0000
Resent-Date: 14 Oct 2002 06:36:02 -0000
Resent-Message-ID: <20021014063602.30811.qmail@sources.redhat.com>
Resent-From: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org (GNATS Filer)
Resent-Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, java-prs@gcc.gnu.org
Resent-Reply-To: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, green@redhat.com
Received: (qmail 27811 invoked from network); 14 Oct 2002 06:27:28 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mx2.redhat.com) (12.150.115.133)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 14 Oct 2002 06:27:28 -0000
Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26])
	by mx2.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g9E6Qps03874
	for <gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org>; Mon, 14 Oct 2002 02:26:51 -0400
Received: from potter.sfbay.redhat.com (potter.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.15])
	by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g9E6RRl01297
	for <gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org>; Mon, 14 Oct 2002 02:27:28 -0400
Received: from louie.sfbay.redhat.com (louie.sfbay.redhat.com [192.168.28.4])
	by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g9E6RRv15981
	for <gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org>; Sun, 13 Oct 2002 23:27:27 -0700
Received: (green@localhost) by louie.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.6.4) id g9E6RMM03375; Sun, 13 Oct 2002 23:27:22 -0700
Message-Id: <200210140627.g9E6RMM03375@louie.sfbay.redhat.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 23:36:00 -0000
From: green@redhat.com
To: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org
X-Send-Pr-Version: 3.113
Subject: java/8219: gcj order of argument evaluation problem
X-SW-Source: 2002-10/txt/msg00536.txt.bz2
List-Id: <gcc-prs.sourceware.org>


>Number:         8219
>Category:       java
>Synopsis:       gcj order of argument evaluation problem
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       critical
>Priority:       medium
>Responsible:    unassigned
>State:          open
>Class:          wrong-code
>Submitter-Id:   net
>Arrival-Date:   Sun Oct 13 23:36:01 PDT 2002
>Closed-Date:
>Last-Modified:
>Originator:     
>Release:        3.3 20021005 (experimental)
>Organization:
>Environment:
System: Linux louie 2.4.7-10smp #1 SMP Thu Sep 6 17:09:31 EDT 2001 i686 unknown
Architecture: i686

	
host: i686-pc-linux-gnu
build: i686-pc-linux-gnu
target: i686-pc-linux-gnu
configured with: /home/green/FSF/GCC/HEAD/gcc/configure --prefix=/louie/green/latest/i --enable-languages=c,c++,java : (reconfigured) 
>Description:
Here's a bug in how gcj evaluates method arguments....

public class bug
{
    private static int first (int x, int y)
    {
        return x;
    }

    public static void main (String[] args)
    {
        int l = args.length;

        /* This should print:
0
0
1
        */
        System.out.println (l);
        System.out.println (first (l, ++l));
        System.out.println (l);
    }
}

This is correct output...

[green@build green]$ gcj -o bug --main=bug bug.java -O0
[green@build green]$ ./bug
0
0
1

This is bad output...

[green@build green]$ gcj -o bug --main=bug bug.java -O2
[green@build green]$ ./bug
0
1
1


Is looks as though the rtl we're generating is bad from the start - so
it's unlikely to be a problem with any on the rtl-based optimizations.


>How-To-Repeat:
See above.
>Fix:
	
>Release-Note:
>Audit-Trail:
>Unformatted: