[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

[Bug c++/18384] [3.3/3.4/4.0 Regression] ICE on zero-length array with empty initializer...



------- Additional Comments From jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org  2004-12-27 20:15 -------
Created an attachment (id=7831)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7831&action=view)
New patch

Regarding max_index, I have removed the if (!TYPE_IS_TYPESIZE (max_index))
gcc_unreachable (); part.  I still think it is useful to first check for
host_integerp (, 1), as that's the common case and we don't need to create
any new trees in that case.
As for designated_index, this differs between 3.3 and 3.4+ it seems.
With GCC 3.3, reshape_init_array can see arbitrary trees in TREE_PURPOSE (),
checking of these happens afterwards, not before reshape_init.	So I think we
certainly want a host_integerp (, 1) there, that will ensure it is an
INTEGER_CST and not negative.  In GCC 3.4 and HEAD, it seems the new parser
doesn't parse
[4] = X nor [4] X style array designated initializers at all, so we IMHO either
can do what will be done in GCC 3.3 too, or remove the designated_index
handling
altoghether and replace with gcc_assert (!TREE_PURPOSE (element_init)).

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18384

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.



Reply to: