From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24086 invoked by alias); 29 Apr 2003 17:26:03 -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 24032 invoked by uid 71); 29 Apr 2003 17:26:01 -0000 Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 17:26:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030429172601.24031.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: jason@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Wolfgang Bangerth Subject: Re: middle-end/10336: [3.4 regression] ICE with -Wunreachable-code (fwd) Reply-To: Wolfgang Bangerth X-SW-Source: 2003-04/txt/msg01361.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR middle-end/10336; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Wolfgang Bangerth To: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Subject: Re: middle-end/10336: [3.4 regression] ICE with -Wunreachable-code (fwd) Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 12:19:26 -0500 (CDT) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 19:04:27 +0200 From: Giovanni Bajo To: Wolfgang Bangerth , s.bosscher@student.tudelft.nl Subject: Re: middle-end/10336: [3.4 regression] ICE with -Wunreachable-code Hello, I tried both testcases available in PR/10336 (the original one and the new one), but I cannot reproduce the bug with either of this: $ gcc-3.3 -v Reading specs from /usr/local/lib/gcc-lib/i686-pc-cygwin/3.3/specs Configured with: ../gcc/configure --program-suffix=-3.3 --enable-languages=c,c++ --enable-threads=posix --enable-shared --enable-checking Thread model: posix gcc version 3.3 20030421 (prerelease) $ gcc-3.4 -v Reading specs from /usr/local/lib/gcc-lib/i686-pc-cygwin/3.4/specs Configured with: ../gcc/configure --enable-languages=c,c++ --program-suffix=-3.4 --enable-threads=posix --enable-shared Thread model: posix gcc version 3.4 20030428 (experimental) I tried both the C and the C++ frontend. Command line was simply "gcc -c -Wunreachable-code". Moreover, the audit trail says that the bug is still present in the C frontend for 3.3: in this case, it should be marked as a 3.3 regression as well (and probably showstopper for the release, given that it breaks the feature with very easy code snippets). Giovanni Bajo