X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
From: "Dave Korn" <dave DOT korn AT artimi DOT com>
To: <rkies AT cpan DOT org>
Cc: <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
References: <14685311 DOT 1187603657458 DOT JavaMail DOT root AT elwamui-cypress DOT atl DOT sa DOT earthlink DOT net>
Subject: RE: Line info causes GCC to bomb?
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 11:25:23 +0100
Message-ID: <076901c7e314$6aa3f6d0$2e08a8c0@CAM.ARTIMI.COM>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; 	charset="utf-8"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
In-Reply-To: <14685311.1187603657458.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id l7KAPb4Q000353

On 20 August 2007 10:54, g6522c wrote:

[  List Cc'd back in.  http://cygwin.com/acronyms#PPIOSPE, thanks!  ]

>>> This preprocessed input causes GCC (3.4.4) to segfault....
>>> 
>>>   # 1 "test.c" 1
>>> 
>>>   int main () {
>>>      return 0;
>>>   }
>>> 
>>> ... and this doesn't:
>>> 
>>>   # 1 "test.c"
>>>   # 1 "test.c" 1
>>> 
>>>   int main () {
>>>     return 0;
>>>   }

> This is from a different front end that I've put together.  It's referred
> to in the sig line.  The line numbering is as documented - partially - in
> the cpp Texinfo manual.  The input seems to be valid for all other builds
> of GCC.   

  I can't find that syntax described in the documentation, can point me at it?

  I note that gcc doesn't generate code like your first form, it always does it the second way, which makes me think that the first #-directive, the one without the trailing number, acts as some kind of introducer or otherwise triggers some internal struct to be set up in cpp without which the second form, with the trailing number, is invalid.


    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/