The following program gives a warning under GCC 7.1 (built on cygwin, 64 bit)
#include
int main()
{
std::vector c {1,2,3,0};
while(c.size() > 0 && c.back() == 0)
{
auto sz = c.size() -1;
c.resize(sz);
}
return 0;
}
$ c++7.1 -O3 tt.cxx
In Funktion »int main()
I added it to bugzilla, Bug 80641
Helmut
le to find all such possbible errors when the complete program
is compiled with this warning enabled?
Even if it were not possible to detect all cases, also detecting some cases
might prevent some bugs.
What do you think about adding a warning "shared mutable data" to GCC?
Helmut Zeisel
Von: "Jonathan Wakely"
> What exactly are you suggesting for the semantics of the warning?
Good question. It is difficult to detect all suspiscious cases, but at least
some of the can be defined:
If we have a function prototype
f(...,Ti xi,...Tj xj,...)
and call the function f(... xi, ..
I compiled GCC 13.1.0 with GCC 12 and had the environment variable CXXFLAGS set
to -std=c++20
This gives the error (both linux and cygin)
gcc-13.1.0/libstdc++-v3/src/c++98/bitmap_allocator.cc:51:23: error: ISO C++17
does not allow dynamic exception specifications
51 | _M_get(size_t __sz) th
>Von: "Jakub Jelinek"
>An: "Helmut Zeisel"
>Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
>Betreff: Re: GCC 13.1 compile error when using CXXFLAGS=-std=c++20
>On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 11:09:19AM +0200, Helmut Zeisel via Gcc wrote:
>> I compiled GCC 13.1.0 with GCC 12 and had the
I wrote some simple program that set a signal handler for SIGFPE, throws a C++
exception in the signal handler
and catches the exception.
I compiled with and without -fnon-call-exceptions (on x64 Linux).
In both cases, the result was the same: the exception was caught and the
destructors were cal
GCC13, c++, cygwin 64:
auto x = 9223372036854775808L
gives the warning: "integer constant is so large that it is unsigned"
But actually the type is signed __int128:
std::cout << x;
gives the error: "ambiguous overload for ‘operator<<’ (operand types are
‘std::ostream’ {aka ‘std::basic_ostre
