public inbox for gcc-prs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: bangerth@dealii.org To: gawrilow@math.tu-berlin.de, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, giovannibajo@libero.it Subject: Re: c++/10661: [3.3/3.4? regression] ICE in instantiate_decl Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 14:19:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20030508141907.18175.qmail@sources.redhat.com> (raw) Old Synopsis: Regression vs. 3.1: ICE on legal code New Synopsis: [3.3/3.4? regression] ICE in instantiate_decl State-Changed-From-To: open->analyzed State-Changed-By: bangerth State-Changed-When: Thu May 8 14:19:06 2003 State-Changed-Why: Ewgenij, let me start out with two remarks: - your chances that someone takes care of this might be higher, if you don't start out whining about the state of 3.3 a few days before the release and then send us a bulk of 80,000 lines of template metaprogramming. This is the most tangled, complicated, unintelligible, evil code I have ever seen. I spent about 3 hours yesterday night reducing it to 46,000 lines, but it's very hard to reduce it and it would have been significantly easier had you sent in a _reduced_ testcase. - I managed to extract about a dozen other testcases that failed somewhere in the compiler while reducing the big chunk. I imagine, you must have seen things like that as well while developing. If you get something like that, please wend them in, preferrably, as said, as _small_ code snippets. Since the code is so incredibly complex, it might be worthwhile to make it a testcase. So if you want and can, I think it would be appreciated if you would set up a system that updates gcc from CVS source every once in a while (day, week) and runs it against your code. This way, you may be able to find bugs in gcc earlier than right before the release. The bug you reported will certainly not be fixed for 3.3.0. That being said: - the problem exists, it is an ICE in instantiate_decl. - it's a regression on 3.3. Code doesn't compile on 3.4, so I can't yet say what's on there - a somewhat smaller testcase is attached as reduced_1.ii - I will coordinate with Giovanni about how to further reduce the code. That's incredibly tedious business- on my way, I found a lot more ICEs. I'll reduce and submit them over time. If someone fixes the bug here and there are follow-up failures, please check for potentially submitted other bugs in this context W. http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=10661
next reply other threads:[~2003-05-08 14:19 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2003-05-08 14:19 bangerth [this message] 2003-05-08 15:16 giovannibajo 2003-05-08 16:26 Wolfgang Bangerth 2003-05-08 16:26 Giovanni Bajo 2003-05-08 16:36 Wolfgang Bangerth 2003-05-08 16:36 Giovanni Bajo
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20030508141907.18175.qmail@sources.redhat.com \ --to=bangerth@dealii.org \ --cc=gawrilow@math.tu-berlin.de \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=giovannibajo@libero.it \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).