Bug 18524 - g++ crashes on one invalid input and one valid one
g++ crashes on one invalid input and one valid one
Product: Red Hat Linux
Classification: Retired
Component: gcc (Show other bugs)
All Linux
medium Severity high
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Jakub Jelinek
David Lawrence
Depends On: 18764 18765
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2000-10-06 09:47 EDT by Omnifarious
Modified: 2007-04-18 12:29 EDT (History)
0 users

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2000-10-10 10:05:18 EDT
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Omnifarious 2000-10-06 09:47:56 EDT
g++ 2.96 has crashed on me twice now.  One time it crashed when I hadn't
put in the header that gave a definition for a class I was using.
The other time it crashed on some code that used the GNU named return value
optimization, which is non-standard, but supposedly supported by g++.

gcc GNATS tracking numbers: c++/611  c++/613

The compiler should not crash.

I entered these bugs into the GNATS system for gcc, and I recieved an
eventual message on gcc-announce claiming the gcc-2.96 was considered to be
a pre-release version, and while C, and FORTRAN were likely to still work,
the C++ compiler probably had a number of issues.
I understand some eagerness to put in new versions of things.  Especially
since the new gcc seems to have much better per-processor optimizations for
the x86 family of chips (including AMDs offerings), but I expect releases
to be stable.  That is, after all, a big part of what I pay RedHat for.  If
didn't care about stability, I'd download and compile the latest and
greatest for myself.
I find the instability of the gcc-2.96 C++ frontend to be disturbing.
I think a reasonable fix would be to provide a set of back-patches to move
gcc back to 2.95.2, and patches to the distributed programs that use C++ so
that they are binary compatible with gcc 2.95.2.
Comment 1 Omnifarious 2000-10-09 22:29:19 EDT
Duplicated the GNATS entries I made into the Bugzilla system as per the e-mail
send out on gcc-announce.
Comment 2 Jakub Jelinek 2000-10-20 12:07:18 EDT
I'll work on fixing #18764 and #18765, so I'm closing this one.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.