From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16130 invoked by alias); 13 Jan 2003 19:06:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 16115 invoked by uid 71); 13 Jan 2003 19:06:01 -0000 Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 19:06:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030113190601.16111.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Janis Johnson Subject: Re: c/8647: [3.3 regression] ICE in GNU99 mode Nr. #2 Reply-To: Janis Johnson X-SW-Source: 2003-01/txt/msg00830.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR c/8647; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Janis Johnson To: bkausbk@web.de, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Subject: Re: c/8647: [3.3 regression] ICE in GNU99 mode Nr. #2 Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 11:06:42 -0800 PR c/8647 reports a regression in 3.3 (also now in the mainline) for an ICE for illegal code. There is a valid error message before the ICE. The ICE message started showing up with this patch: 2002-01-23 Zack Weinberg * diagnostic.c (internal_error): Do ICE suppression only when ENABLE_CHECKING is not defined. So, although there is an ICE, this is not a regression and the ICE message will not appear with a release version of GCC. I recommend lowering the priority of this PR and removing "regression" from the synopsis. http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=8647