https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80913
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80913
--- Comment #10 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Author: nathan
Date: Tue May 30 14:43:45 2017
New Revision: 248687
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248687&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/80913
* name-lookup.c (add_decl_to_level): Asser
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80913
--- Comment #9 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #7 from Nathan Sidwell ---
> It doesn't appear to be the stathack patch at fault here. I still get the
> infinite loop with my reduced testcase when I revert it. (Which i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80913
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|i386-pc-solaris2.12,|i386-pc-solaris2.12,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80913
--- Comment #7 from Nathan Sidwell ---
It doesn't appear to be the stathack patch at fault here. I still get the
infinite loop with my reduced testcase when I revert it. (Which is good,
because I can't see how that patch could cause this behavi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80913
--- Comment #6 from Nathan Sidwell ---
I have a small reproducer, regardless of bitsize:
extern int meminfo ();
struct meminfo {};
void frob ()
{
meminf ();
}
stat hack when the struct decl is last. It looks like a patch I have on the
modul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80913
--- Comment #5 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #4 from Nathan Sidwell ---
> yes, must be something with a 32-bit target. I can reproduce it on x86_64
> linux host targeting either i386-linux or i386-solaris.
>
> We ha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80913
--- Comment #4 from Nathan Sidwell ---
yes, must be something with a 32-bit target. I can reproduce it on x86_64
linux host targeting either i386-linux or i386-solaris.
We have a TYPE_DECL whose TREE_CHAIN points to itself. So when the spelli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80913
--- Comment #3 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #1 from Nathan Sidwell ---
[...]
> But x86_64-linux is not being affected in the way you describe. The backtrace
> is something borking in the spelling correcting stuff.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80913
--- Comment #2 from Nathan Sidwell ---
oh, you said that in the title :)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80913
--- Comment #1 from Nathan Sidwell ---
My money's on:
Stat hack representation
* name-lookup.c (STAT_HACK_P, STAT_TYPE, STAT_DECL,
MAYBE_STAT_DECL, MAYBE_STAT_TYPE): New.
(stat_hack): New.
(find_namespace_b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80913
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80913
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
13 matches
Mail list logo
