www.delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi   search  
Mail Archives: djgpp/2000/02/24/18:21:02

Message-ID: <38B5A8F2.943DAB97@netcom.ca>
From: MM <mm AT netcom DOT ca>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: Possible Compiler Bug
References: <38B57379 DOT 817FFBE4 AT netcom DOT ca> <lk3bbs0088iisl9c5sv9m235jpu6opn6gp AT 4ax DOT com>
Lines: 37
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2000 16:56:02 -0500
NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.123.36.35
X-Complaints-To: abuse AT netcom DOT ca
X-Trace: tor-nn1.netcom.ca 951429156 216.123.36.35 (Thu, 24 Feb 2000 16:52:36 EDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2000 16:52:36 EDT
Organization: Netcom Canada
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Thanks for the reply Jason.  Yes, I am using a slightly older version of gcc,
Ii'll update ASAP.  But everything in the code, up to but not including, the
this->funcptr() call should be valid since it was basically taken from a C++
faq (not Bob's C++ faq, but a widely distributed one).  I'll look into other
forms of accomplishing my task, but so far I haven't been able to come up
with anything as efficient as this is.  Thanks for your help.

Jason Green wrote:

> MM <mm AT netcom DOT ca> wrote:
>
> > The file I've attached causes djgpp to kill the compiler and tell me to
> > submit a full bug report.  I would do so, but first I want to make sure
> > this happens to others as well.  If you could please take a look at the
> > code and tell me what I'm doing wrong or if it shouldn't be done like
> > that at all to begin with I'd greatly appreciate it.
> > Thanks,
>
> If gcc says to submit a bug report then that is by itself fair
> confirmation that you have found a bug. ;-/  If you would like
> confirmation from others then please give the exact compile line you
> use, also say what version of gcc.
>
> I have tried to replicate the problem, but all I get are compiler
> errors about the code.  The is with gcc 2.95.2, maybe you have an
> older version and the bug is already fixed?
>
> As to whether what you are doing is ok or not, well I get compile
> errors so that should tell you something ;-) I don't understand what
> you are trying to do, but I would point out that in C++ there are
> better ways of doing some things that would require function pointers
> in C.  Maybe you want to investigate derived classes, function
> overloading and virtual functions?
>
> Of course, whether or not the code is legal, and whether or not the
> style is Good, the compiler should not crash.

- Raw text -


  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright © 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019