From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6945 invoked by alias); 22 Sep 2004 21:50:16 -0000 Mailing-List: contact java-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: java-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 6929 invoked by uid 48); 22 Sep 2004 21:50:16 -0000 Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 21:50:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20040922215016.6922.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org" To: java-prs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20040117152119.13720.roland.illig@gmx.de> References: <20040117152119.13720.roland.illig@gmx.de> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug libgcj/13720] gcc/libjava/java/lang/natSystem.cc: syntax error using "unsigned jint" X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2004-q3/txt/msg00579.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-09-22 21:50 ------- A couple notes on this patch. First, we don't support compiling libgcj with a different version of gcj other than the one it comes with. The reason for this is that gcj and libgcj are tightly coupled; for instance gcj and libgcj both have information about the exact format of java.lang.Class. Second, I'm not sure this patch is correct. E.g., + || src_offset - (-count) >= 0 // check for possible integer overflow Suppose src_offset==10 and count==3. Then src_offset-(-count) == 7, which is >= 0, but no integer overflow has occurred. (This is a perfectly valid situation if the source array's length is >= 13) So, I'm closing this and not checking in the patch. -- What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13720