Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 447212
Macros with For Next loops broken in OpenOffice.org.
Last modified: 2008-05-29 12:53:00 EDT
Description of problem:
Using the default OpenOffice.org for 64-Bit Fedora 9, the following simple macro
will not work:
Dim i As Integer
For i = 1 To 2
The problem is that the Next statement generates an error. This macro should
have always worked. If For next loops do not function, then a large percentage
of macros will likely not function.
groan, some optimization problem
void ImpPutDouble( SbxValues* p, double n, BOOL bCoreString )
switch( +p->eType )
aTmp.pInteger = &p->nInteger; goto direct;
aTmp.eType = SbxDataType( p->eType | SbxBYREF );
p = &aTmp; goto start;
case SbxBYREF | SbxINTEGER:
*p->pInteger = (INT16) n; break;
We have a SbxINTEGER, we change the tmp to SbxBYREF | SbxINTEGER and jump to the
start of the switch but we don't get to the desired case, if I add a simple
printf after p = &aTmp to reference the changed eType then it works
Can I get preprocessed source for the file in question, and command line options
used? If the arch really ia64, or x86_64?
Created attachment 305916 [details]
this seems to reproduce this for me
g++ -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing test.ii
g++ -O2 test.ii
and no error. This is x86_64 of course, I only ported ia64 a month or two ago
and there are no fedora ia64 arch team builds yet.
Does this reproduce for you standalone ?
This is certainly x86_64...
I found this problem while writing an article for LinuxIdentity magazine about
Important software in Fedora, and I mention it in the magazine. If you have a
speculation on when this will be fixed and pushed to the repositories, I will
mention something like
"The problem was found and fixed by the Fedora team in less than a day, and the
fix should be in place in <a week or so>".
You are moving fast enough that the fix may be in place before the article is
This has been fixed upstream already, though I don't plan a GCC errata right
now, I'd like to wait at least a month to get 4.3.1 in and gather a bunch of
other bugfixes. I guess you can work around it in OOo by building this source
file with -fstrict-aliasing if you want to errata OOo before a new gcc will land
into dist-f9 buildroots.
Building OOo with -fstrict-aliasing in general right now is unfortunately
impossible, though of course I can force it on for that particular file.
We've a likely OOo 2.4.1 update around June the 3rd, I guess that's too soon for
a new gcc ?
Closing as upstream. Whenever I update gcc in rawhide and/or in Fedora 9, it
will get the fix.