[ < ] | [ > ] | [ << ] | [ Up ] | [ >> ] | [Top] | [Contents] | [Index] | [ ? ] |
If you are not sure whether you have found a bug, here are some guidelines:
asm
statement), that is a compiler bug, unless the
compiler reports errors (not just warnings) which would ordinarily
prevent the assembler from being run.
However, you must double-check to make sure, because you may have run into an incompatibility between GNU C and traditional C (see section 9.5 Incompatibilities of GCC). These incompatibilities might be considered bugs, but they are inescapable consequences of valuable features.
Or you may have a program whose behavior is undefined, which happened by chance to give the desired results with another C or C++ compiler.
For example, in many nonoptimizing compilers, you can write `x;'
at the end of a function instead of `return x;', with the same
results. But the value of the function is undefined if return
is omitted; it is not a bug when GCC produces different results.
Problems often result from expressions with two increment operators,
as in f (*p++, *p++)
. Your previous compiler might have
interpreted that expression the way you intended; GCC might
interpret it another way. Neither compiler is wrong. The bug is
in your code.
After you have localized the error to a single source line, it should be easy to check for these things. If your program is correct and well defined, you have found a compiler bug.
[ < ] | [ > ] | [ << ] | [ Up ] | [ >> ] | [Top] | [Contents] | [Index] | [ ? ] |