xref: /dragonfly/contrib/gcc-4.7/gcc/doc/trouble.texi (revision d4ef6694)
1@c Copyright (C) 1988, 1989, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998,
2@c 1999, 2000, 2001, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010
3@c Free Software Foundation, Inc.
4@c This is part of the GCC manual.
5@c For copying conditions, see the file gcc.texi.
6
7@node Trouble
8@chapter Known Causes of Trouble with GCC
9@cindex bugs, known
10@cindex installation trouble
11@cindex known causes of trouble
12
13This section describes known problems that affect users of GCC@.  Most
14of these are not GCC bugs per se---if they were, we would fix them.
15But the result for a user may be like the result of a bug.
16
17Some of these problems are due to bugs in other software, some are
18missing features that are too much work to add, and some are places
19where people's opinions differ as to what is best.
20
21@menu
22* Actual Bugs::         Bugs we will fix later.
23* Cross-Compiler Problems:: Common problems of cross compiling with GCC.
24* Interoperation::      Problems using GCC with other compilers,
25                        and with certain linkers, assemblers and debuggers.
26* Incompatibilities::   GCC is incompatible with traditional C.
27* Fixed Headers::       GCC uses corrected versions of system header files.
28                        This is necessary, but doesn't always work smoothly.
29* Standard Libraries::  GCC uses the system C library, which might not be
30                        compliant with the ISO C standard.
31* Disappointments::     Regrettable things we can't change, but not quite bugs.
32* C++ Misunderstandings:: Common misunderstandings with GNU C++.
33* Non-bugs::            Things we think are right, but some others disagree.
34* Warnings and Errors:: Which problems in your code get warnings,
35                        and which get errors.
36@end menu
37
38@node Actual Bugs
39@section Actual Bugs We Haven't Fixed Yet
40
41@itemize @bullet
42@item
43The @code{fixincludes} script interacts badly with automounters; if the
44directory of system header files is automounted, it tends to be
45unmounted while @code{fixincludes} is running.  This would seem to be a
46bug in the automounter.  We don't know any good way to work around it.
47@end itemize
48
49@node Cross-Compiler Problems
50@section Cross-Compiler Problems
51
52You may run into problems with cross compilation on certain machines,
53for several reasons.
54
55@itemize @bullet
56@item
57At present, the program @file{mips-tfile} which adds debug
58support to object files on Tru64 UNIX systems does not work in a cross
59compile environment.
60@end itemize
61
62@node Interoperation
63@section Interoperation
64
65This section lists various difficulties encountered in using GCC
66together with other compilers or with the assemblers, linkers,
67libraries and debuggers on certain systems.
68
69@itemize @bullet
70@item
71On many platforms, GCC supports a different ABI for C++ than do other
72compilers, so the object files compiled by GCC cannot be used with object
73files generated by another C++ compiler.
74
75An area where the difference is most apparent is name mangling.  The use
76of different name mangling is intentional, to protect you from more subtle
77problems.
78Compilers differ as to many internal details of C++ implementation,
79including: how class instances are laid out, how multiple inheritance is
80implemented, and how virtual function calls are handled.  If the name
81encoding were made the same, your programs would link against libraries
82provided from other compilers---but the programs would then crash when
83run.  Incompatible libraries are then detected at link time, rather than
84at run time.
85
86@item
87On some BSD systems, including some versions of Ultrix, use of profiling
88causes static variable destructors (currently used only in C++) not to
89be run.
90
91@item
92On some SGI systems, when you use @option{-lgl_s} as an option,
93it gets translated magically to @samp{-lgl_s -lX11_s -lc_s}.
94Naturally, this does not happen when you use GCC@.
95You must specify all three options explicitly.
96
97@item
98On a SPARC, GCC aligns all values of type @code{double} on an 8-byte
99boundary, and it expects every @code{double} to be so aligned.  The Sun
100compiler usually gives @code{double} values 8-byte alignment, with one
101exception: function arguments of type @code{double} may not be aligned.
102
103As a result, if a function compiled with Sun CC takes the address of an
104argument of type @code{double} and passes this pointer of type
105@code{double *} to a function compiled with GCC, dereferencing the
106pointer may cause a fatal signal.
107
108One way to solve this problem is to compile your entire program with GCC@.
109Another solution is to modify the function that is compiled with
110Sun CC to copy the argument into a local variable; local variables
111are always properly aligned.  A third solution is to modify the function
112that uses the pointer to dereference it via the following function
113@code{access_double} instead of directly with @samp{*}:
114
115@smallexample
116inline double
117access_double (double *unaligned_ptr)
118@{
119  union d2i @{ double d; int i[2]; @};
120
121  union d2i *p = (union d2i *) unaligned_ptr;
122  union d2i u;
123
124  u.i[0] = p->i[0];
125  u.i[1] = p->i[1];
126
127  return u.d;
128@}
129@end smallexample
130
131@noindent
132Storing into the pointer can be done likewise with the same union.
133
134@item
135On Solaris, the @code{malloc} function in the @file{libmalloc.a} library
136may allocate memory that is only 4 byte aligned.  Since GCC on the
137SPARC assumes that doubles are 8 byte aligned, this may result in a
138fatal signal if doubles are stored in memory allocated by the
139@file{libmalloc.a} library.
140
141The solution is to not use the @file{libmalloc.a} library.  Use instead
142@code{malloc} and related functions from @file{libc.a}; they do not have
143this problem.
144
145@item
146On the HP PA machine, ADB sometimes fails to work on functions compiled
147with GCC@.  Specifically, it fails to work on functions that use
148@code{alloca} or variable-size arrays.  This is because GCC doesn't
149generate HP-UX unwind descriptors for such functions.  It may even be
150impossible to generate them.
151
152@item
153Debugging (@option{-g}) is not supported on the HP PA machine, unless you use
154the preliminary GNU tools.
155
156@item
157Taking the address of a label may generate errors from the HP-UX
158PA assembler.  GAS for the PA does not have this problem.
159
160@item
161Using floating point parameters for indirect calls to static functions
162will not work when using the HP assembler.  There simply is no way for GCC
163to specify what registers hold arguments for static functions when using
164the HP assembler.  GAS for the PA does not have this problem.
165
166@item
167In extremely rare cases involving some very large functions you may
168receive errors from the HP linker complaining about an out of bounds
169unconditional branch offset.  This used to occur more often in previous
170versions of GCC, but is now exceptionally rare.  If you should run
171into it, you can work around by making your function smaller.
172
173@item
174GCC compiled code sometimes emits warnings from the HP-UX assembler of
175the form:
176
177@smallexample
178(warning) Use of GR3 when
179  frame >= 8192 may cause conflict.
180@end smallexample
181
182These warnings are harmless and can be safely ignored.
183
184@item
185In extremely rare cases involving some very large functions you may
186receive errors from the AIX Assembler complaining about a displacement
187that is too large.  If you should run into it, you can work around by
188making your function smaller.
189
190@item
191The @file{libstdc++.a} library in GCC relies on the SVR4 dynamic
192linker semantics which merges global symbols between libraries and
193applications, especially necessary for C++ streams functionality.
194This is not the default behavior of AIX shared libraries and dynamic
195linking.  @file{libstdc++.a} is built on AIX with ``runtime-linking''
196enabled so that symbol merging can occur.  To utilize this feature,
197the application linked with @file{libstdc++.a} must include the
198@option{-Wl,-brtl} flag on the link line.  G++ cannot impose this
199because this option may interfere with the semantics of the user
200program and users may not always use @samp{g++} to link his or her
201application.  Applications are not required to use the
202@option{-Wl,-brtl} flag on the link line---the rest of the
203@file{libstdc++.a} library which is not dependent on the symbol
204merging semantics will continue to function correctly.
205
206@item
207An application can interpose its own definition of functions for
208functions invoked by @file{libstdc++.a} with ``runtime-linking''
209enabled on AIX@.  To accomplish this the application must be linked
210with ``runtime-linking'' option and the functions explicitly must be
211exported by the application (@option{-Wl,-brtl,-bE:exportfile}).
212
213@item
214AIX on the RS/6000 provides support (NLS) for environments outside of
215the United States.  Compilers and assemblers use NLS to support
216locale-specific representations of various objects including
217floating-point numbers (@samp{.} vs @samp{,} for separating decimal
218fractions).  There have been problems reported where the library linked
219with GCC does not produce the same floating-point formats that the
220assembler accepts.  If you have this problem, set the @env{LANG}
221environment variable to @samp{C} or @samp{En_US}.
222
223@item
224@opindex fdollars-in-identifiers
225Even if you specify @option{-fdollars-in-identifiers},
226you cannot successfully use @samp{$} in identifiers on the RS/6000 due
227to a restriction in the IBM assembler.  GAS supports these
228identifiers.
229
230@end itemize
231
232@node Incompatibilities
233@section Incompatibilities of GCC
234@cindex incompatibilities of GCC
235@opindex traditional
236
237There are several noteworthy incompatibilities between GNU C and K&R
238(non-ISO) versions of C@.
239
240@itemize @bullet
241@cindex string constants
242@cindex read-only strings
243@cindex shared strings
244@item
245GCC normally makes string constants read-only.  If several
246identical-looking string constants are used, GCC stores only one
247copy of the string.
248
249@cindex @code{mktemp}, and constant strings
250One consequence is that you cannot call @code{mktemp} with a string
251constant argument.  The function @code{mktemp} always alters the
252string its argument points to.
253
254@cindex @code{sscanf}, and constant strings
255@cindex @code{fscanf}, and constant strings
256@cindex @code{scanf}, and constant strings
257Another consequence is that @code{sscanf} does not work on some very
258old systems when passed a string constant as its format control string
259or input.  This is because @code{sscanf} incorrectly tries to write
260into the string constant.  Likewise @code{fscanf} and @code{scanf}.
261
262The solution to these problems is to change the program to use
263@code{char}-array variables with initialization strings for these
264purposes instead of string constants.
265
266@item
267@code{-2147483648} is positive.
268
269This is because 2147483648 cannot fit in the type @code{int}, so
270(following the ISO C rules) its data type is @code{unsigned long int}.
271Negating this value yields 2147483648 again.
272
273@item
274GCC does not substitute macro arguments when they appear inside of
275string constants.  For example, the following macro in GCC
276
277@smallexample
278#define foo(a) "a"
279@end smallexample
280
281@noindent
282will produce output @code{"a"} regardless of what the argument @var{a} is.
283
284@cindex @code{setjmp} incompatibilities
285@cindex @code{longjmp} incompatibilities
286@item
287When you use @code{setjmp} and @code{longjmp}, the only automatic
288variables guaranteed to remain valid are those declared
289@code{volatile}.  This is a consequence of automatic register
290allocation.  Consider this function:
291
292@smallexample
293jmp_buf j;
294
295foo ()
296@{
297  int a, b;
298
299  a = fun1 ();
300  if (setjmp (j))
301    return a;
302
303  a = fun2 ();
304  /* @r{@code{longjmp (j)} may occur in @code{fun3}.} */
305  return a + fun3 ();
306@}
307@end smallexample
308
309Here @code{a} may or may not be restored to its first value when the
310@code{longjmp} occurs.  If @code{a} is allocated in a register, then
311its first value is restored; otherwise, it keeps the last value stored
312in it.
313
314@opindex W
315If you use the @option{-W} option with the @option{-O} option, you will
316get a warning when GCC thinks such a problem might be possible.
317
318@item
319Programs that use preprocessing directives in the middle of macro
320arguments do not work with GCC@.  For example, a program like this
321will not work:
322
323@smallexample
324@group
325foobar (
326#define luser
327        hack)
328@end group
329@end smallexample
330
331ISO C does not permit such a construct.
332
333@item
334K&R compilers allow comments to cross over an inclusion boundary
335(i.e.@: started in an include file and ended in the including file).
336
337@cindex external declaration scope
338@cindex scope of external declarations
339@cindex declaration scope
340@item
341Declarations of external variables and functions within a block apply
342only to the block containing the declaration.  In other words, they
343have the same scope as any other declaration in the same place.
344
345In some other C compilers, an @code{extern} declaration affects all the
346rest of the file even if it happens within a block.
347
348@item
349In traditional C, you can combine @code{long}, etc., with a typedef name,
350as shown here:
351
352@smallexample
353typedef int foo;
354typedef long foo bar;
355@end smallexample
356
357In ISO C, this is not allowed: @code{long} and other type modifiers
358require an explicit @code{int}.
359
360@cindex typedef names as function parameters
361@item
362PCC allows typedef names to be used as function parameters.
363
364@item
365Traditional C allows the following erroneous pair of declarations to
366appear together in a given scope:
367
368@smallexample
369typedef int foo;
370typedef foo foo;
371@end smallexample
372
373@item
374GCC treats all characters of identifiers as significant.  According to
375K&R-1 (2.2), ``No more than the first eight characters are significant,
376although more may be used.''.  Also according to K&R-1 (2.2), ``An
377identifier is a sequence of letters and digits; the first character must
378be a letter.  The underscore _ counts as a letter.'', but GCC also
379allows dollar signs in identifiers.
380
381@cindex whitespace
382@item
383PCC allows whitespace in the middle of compound assignment operators
384such as @samp{+=}.  GCC, following the ISO standard, does not
385allow this.
386
387@cindex apostrophes
388@cindex @code{'}
389@item
390GCC complains about unterminated character constants inside of
391preprocessing conditionals that fail.  Some programs have English
392comments enclosed in conditionals that are guaranteed to fail; if these
393comments contain apostrophes, GCC will probably report an error.  For
394example, this code would produce an error:
395
396@smallexample
397#if 0
398You can't expect this to work.
399#endif
400@end smallexample
401
402The best solution to such a problem is to put the text into an actual
403C comment delimited by @samp{/*@dots{}*/}.
404
405@item
406Many user programs contain the declaration @samp{long time ();}.  In the
407past, the system header files on many systems did not actually declare
408@code{time}, so it did not matter what type your program declared it to
409return.  But in systems with ISO C headers, @code{time} is declared to
410return @code{time_t}, and if that is not the same as @code{long}, then
411@samp{long time ();} is erroneous.
412
413The solution is to change your program to use appropriate system headers
414(@code{<time.h>} on systems with ISO C headers) and not to declare
415@code{time} if the system header files declare it, or failing that to
416use @code{time_t} as the return type of @code{time}.
417
418@cindex @code{float} as function value type
419@item
420When compiling functions that return @code{float}, PCC converts it to
421a double.  GCC actually returns a @code{float}.  If you are concerned
422with PCC compatibility, you should declare your functions to return
423@code{double}; you might as well say what you mean.
424
425@cindex structures
426@cindex unions
427@item
428When compiling functions that return structures or unions, GCC
429output code normally uses a method different from that used on most
430versions of Unix.  As a result, code compiled with GCC cannot call
431a structure-returning function compiled with PCC, and vice versa.
432
433The method used by GCC is as follows: a structure or union which is
4341, 2, 4 or 8 bytes long is returned like a scalar.  A structure or union
435with any other size is stored into an address supplied by the caller
436(usually in a special, fixed register, but on some machines it is passed
437on the stack).  The target hook @code{TARGET_STRUCT_VALUE_RTX}
438tells GCC where to pass this address.
439
440By contrast, PCC on most target machines returns structures and unions
441of any size by copying the data into an area of static storage, and then
442returning the address of that storage as if it were a pointer value.
443The caller must copy the data from that memory area to the place where
444the value is wanted.  GCC does not use this method because it is
445slower and nonreentrant.
446
447On some newer machines, PCC uses a reentrant convention for all
448structure and union returning.  GCC on most of these machines uses a
449compatible convention when returning structures and unions in memory,
450but still returns small structures and unions in registers.
451
452@opindex fpcc-struct-return
453You can tell GCC to use a compatible convention for all structure and
454union returning with the option @option{-fpcc-struct-return}.
455
456@cindex preprocessing tokens
457@cindex preprocessing numbers
458@item
459GCC complains about program fragments such as @samp{0x74ae-0x4000}
460which appear to be two hexadecimal constants separated by the minus
461operator.  Actually, this string is a single @dfn{preprocessing token}.
462Each such token must correspond to one token in C@.  Since this does not,
463GCC prints an error message.  Although it may appear obvious that what
464is meant is an operator and two values, the ISO C standard specifically
465requires that this be treated as erroneous.
466
467A @dfn{preprocessing token} is a @dfn{preprocessing number} if it
468begins with a digit and is followed by letters, underscores, digits,
469periods and @samp{e+}, @samp{e-}, @samp{E+}, @samp{E-}, @samp{p+},
470@samp{p-}, @samp{P+}, or @samp{P-} character sequences.  (In strict C90
471mode, the sequences @samp{p+}, @samp{p-}, @samp{P+} and @samp{P-} cannot
472appear in preprocessing numbers.)
473
474To make the above program fragment valid, place whitespace in front of
475the minus sign.  This whitespace will end the preprocessing number.
476@end itemize
477
478@node Fixed Headers
479@section Fixed Header Files
480
481GCC needs to install corrected versions of some system header files.
482This is because most target systems have some header files that won't
483work with GCC unless they are changed.  Some have bugs, some are
484incompatible with ISO C, and some depend on special features of other
485compilers.
486
487Installing GCC automatically creates and installs the fixed header
488files, by running a program called @code{fixincludes}.  Normally, you
489don't need to pay attention to this.  But there are cases where it
490doesn't do the right thing automatically.
491
492@itemize @bullet
493@item
494If you update the system's header files, such as by installing a new
495system version, the fixed header files of GCC are not automatically
496updated.  They can be updated using the @command{mkheaders} script
497installed in
498@file{@var{libexecdir}/gcc/@var{target}/@var{version}/install-tools/}.
499
500@item
501On some systems, header file directories contain
502machine-specific symbolic links in certain places.  This makes it
503possible to share most of the header files among hosts running the
504same version of the system on different machine models.
505
506The programs that fix the header files do not understand this special
507way of using symbolic links; therefore, the directory of fixed header
508files is good only for the machine model used to build it.
509
510It is possible to make separate sets of fixed header files for the
511different machine models, and arrange a structure of symbolic links so
512as to use the proper set, but you'll have to do this by hand.
513@end itemize
514
515@node Standard Libraries
516@section Standard Libraries
517
518@opindex Wall
519GCC by itself attempts to be a conforming freestanding implementation.
520@xref{Standards,,Language Standards Supported by GCC}, for details of
521what this means.  Beyond the library facilities required of such an
522implementation, the rest of the C library is supplied by the vendor of
523the operating system.  If that C library doesn't conform to the C
524standards, then your programs might get warnings (especially when using
525@option{-Wall}) that you don't expect.
526
527For example, the @code{sprintf} function on SunOS 4.1.3 returns
528@code{char *} while the C standard says that @code{sprintf} returns an
529@code{int}.  The @code{fixincludes} program could make the prototype for
530this function match the Standard, but that would be wrong, since the
531function will still return @code{char *}.
532
533If you need a Standard compliant library, then you need to find one, as
534GCC does not provide one.  The GNU C library (called @code{glibc})
535provides ISO C, POSIX, BSD, SystemV and X/Open compatibility for
536GNU/Linux and HURD-based GNU systems; no recent version of it supports
537other systems, though some very old versions did.  Version 2.2 of the
538GNU C library includes nearly complete C99 support.  You could also ask
539your operating system vendor if newer libraries are available.
540
541@node Disappointments
542@section Disappointments and Misunderstandings
543
544These problems are perhaps regrettable, but we don't know any practical
545way around them.
546
547@itemize @bullet
548@item
549Certain local variables aren't recognized by debuggers when you compile
550with optimization.
551
552This occurs because sometimes GCC optimizes the variable out of
553existence.  There is no way to tell the debugger how to compute the
554value such a variable ``would have had'', and it is not clear that would
555be desirable anyway.  So GCC simply does not mention the eliminated
556variable when it writes debugging information.
557
558You have to expect a certain amount of disagreement between the
559executable and your source code, when you use optimization.
560
561@cindex conflicting types
562@cindex scope of declaration
563@item
564Users often think it is a bug when GCC reports an error for code
565like this:
566
567@smallexample
568int foo (struct mumble *);
569
570struct mumble @{ @dots{} @};
571
572int foo (struct mumble *x)
573@{ @dots{} @}
574@end smallexample
575
576This code really is erroneous, because the scope of @code{struct
577mumble} in the prototype is limited to the argument list containing it.
578It does not refer to the @code{struct mumble} defined with file scope
579immediately below---they are two unrelated types with similar names in
580different scopes.
581
582But in the definition of @code{foo}, the file-scope type is used
583because that is available to be inherited.  Thus, the definition and
584the prototype do not match, and you get an error.
585
586This behavior may seem silly, but it's what the ISO standard specifies.
587It is easy enough for you to make your code work by moving the
588definition of @code{struct mumble} above the prototype.  It's not worth
589being incompatible with ISO C just to avoid an error for the example
590shown above.
591
592@item
593Accesses to bit-fields even in volatile objects works by accessing larger
594objects, such as a byte or a word.  You cannot rely on what size of
595object is accessed in order to read or write the bit-field; it may even
596vary for a given bit-field according to the precise usage.
597
598If you care about controlling the amount of memory that is accessed, use
599volatile but do not use bit-fields.
600
601@item
602GCC comes with shell scripts to fix certain known problems in system
603header files.  They install corrected copies of various header files in
604a special directory where only GCC will normally look for them.  The
605scripts adapt to various systems by searching all the system header
606files for the problem cases that we know about.
607
608If new system header files are installed, nothing automatically arranges
609to update the corrected header files.  They can be updated using the
610@command{mkheaders} script installed in
611@file{@var{libexecdir}/gcc/@var{target}/@var{version}/install-tools/}.
612
613@item
614@cindex floating point precision
615On 68000 and x86 systems, for instance, you can get paradoxical results
616if you test the precise values of floating point numbers.  For example,
617you can find that a floating point value which is not a NaN is not equal
618to itself.  This results from the fact that the floating point registers
619hold a few more bits of precision than fit in a @code{double} in memory.
620Compiled code moves values between memory and floating point registers
621at its convenience, and moving them into memory truncates them.
622
623@opindex ffloat-store
624You can partially avoid this problem by using the @option{-ffloat-store}
625option (@pxref{Optimize Options}).
626
627@item
628On AIX and other platforms without weak symbol support, templates
629need to be instantiated explicitly and symbols for static members
630of templates will not be generated.
631
632@item
633On AIX, GCC scans object files and library archives for static
634constructors and destructors when linking an application before the
635linker prunes unreferenced symbols.  This is necessary to prevent the
636AIX linker from mistakenly assuming that static constructor or
637destructor are unused and removing them before the scanning can occur.
638All static constructors and destructors found will be referenced even
639though the modules in which they occur may not be used by the program.
640This may lead to both increased executable size and unexpected symbol
641references.
642@end itemize
643
644@node C++ Misunderstandings
645@section Common Misunderstandings with GNU C++
646
647@cindex misunderstandings in C++
648@cindex surprises in C++
649@cindex C++ misunderstandings
650C++ is a complex language and an evolving one, and its standard
651definition (the ISO C++ standard) was only recently completed.  As a
652result, your C++ compiler may occasionally surprise you, even when its
653behavior is correct.  This section discusses some areas that frequently
654give rise to questions of this sort.
655
656@menu
657* Static Definitions::  Static member declarations are not definitions
658* Name lookup::         Name lookup, templates, and accessing members of base classes
659* Temporaries::         Temporaries may vanish before you expect
660* Copy Assignment::     Copy Assignment operators copy virtual bases twice
661@end menu
662
663@node Static Definitions
664@subsection Declare @emph{and} Define Static Members
665
666@cindex C++ static data, declaring and defining
667@cindex static data in C++, declaring and defining
668@cindex declaring static data in C++
669@cindex defining static data in C++
670When a class has static data members, it is not enough to @emph{declare}
671the static member; you must also @emph{define} it.  For example:
672
673@smallexample
674class Foo
675@{
676  @dots{}
677  void method();
678  static int bar;
679@};
680@end smallexample
681
682This declaration only establishes that the class @code{Foo} has an
683@code{int} named @code{Foo::bar}, and a member function named
684@code{Foo::method}.  But you still need to define @emph{both}
685@code{method} and @code{bar} elsewhere.  According to the ISO
686standard, you must supply an initializer in one (and only one) source
687file, such as:
688
689@smallexample
690int Foo::bar = 0;
691@end smallexample
692
693Other C++ compilers may not correctly implement the standard behavior.
694As a result, when you switch to @command{g++} from one of these compilers,
695you may discover that a program that appeared to work correctly in fact
696does not conform to the standard: @command{g++} reports as undefined
697symbols any static data members that lack definitions.
698
699
700@node Name lookup
701@subsection Name lookup, templates, and accessing members of base classes
702
703@cindex base class members
704@cindex two-stage name lookup
705@cindex dependent name lookup
706
707The C++ standard prescribes that all names that are not dependent on
708template parameters are bound to their present definitions when parsing
709a template function or class.@footnote{The C++ standard just uses the
710term ``dependent'' for names that depend on the type or value of
711template parameters.  This shorter term will also be used in the rest of
712this section.}  Only names that are dependent are looked up at the point
713of instantiation.  For example, consider
714
715@smallexample
716  void foo(double);
717
718  struct A @{
719    template <typename T>
720    void f () @{
721      foo (1);        // @r{1}
722      int i = N;      // @r{2}
723      T t;
724      t.bar();        // @r{3}
725      foo (t);        // @r{4}
726    @}
727
728    static const int N;
729  @};
730@end smallexample
731
732Here, the names @code{foo} and @code{N} appear in a context that does
733not depend on the type of @code{T}.  The compiler will thus require that
734they are defined in the context of use in the template, not only before
735the point of instantiation, and will here use @code{::foo(double)} and
736@code{A::N}, respectively.  In particular, it will convert the integer
737value to a @code{double} when passing it to @code{::foo(double)}.
738
739Conversely, @code{bar} and the call to @code{foo} in the fourth marked
740line are used in contexts that do depend on the type of @code{T}, so
741they are only looked up at the point of instantiation, and you can
742provide declarations for them after declaring the template, but before
743instantiating it.  In particular, if you instantiate @code{A::f<int>},
744the last line will call an overloaded @code{::foo(int)} if one was
745provided, even if after the declaration of @code{struct A}.
746
747This distinction between lookup of dependent and non-dependent names is
748called two-stage (or dependent) name lookup.  G++ implements it
749since version 3.4.
750
751Two-stage name lookup sometimes leads to situations with behavior
752different from non-template codes.  The most common is probably this:
753
754@smallexample
755  template <typename T> struct Base @{
756    int i;
757  @};
758
759  template <typename T> struct Derived : public Base<T> @{
760    int get_i() @{ return i; @}
761  @};
762@end smallexample
763
764In @code{get_i()}, @code{i} is not used in a dependent context, so the
765compiler will look for a name declared at the enclosing namespace scope
766(which is the global scope here).  It will not look into the base class,
767since that is dependent and you may declare specializations of
768@code{Base} even after declaring @code{Derived}, so the compiler can't
769really know what @code{i} would refer to.  If there is no global
770variable @code{i}, then you will get an error message.
771
772In order to make it clear that you want the member of the base class,
773you need to defer lookup until instantiation time, at which the base
774class is known.  For this, you need to access @code{i} in a dependent
775context, by either using @code{this->i} (remember that @code{this} is of
776type @code{Derived<T>*}, so is obviously dependent), or using
777@code{Base<T>::i}.  Alternatively, @code{Base<T>::i} might be brought
778into scope by a @code{using}-declaration.
779
780Another, similar example involves calling member functions of a base
781class:
782
783@smallexample
784  template <typename T> struct Base @{
785      int f();
786  @};
787
788  template <typename T> struct Derived : Base<T> @{
789      int g() @{ return f(); @};
790  @};
791@end smallexample
792
793Again, the call to @code{f()} is not dependent on template arguments
794(there are no arguments that depend on the type @code{T}, and it is also
795not otherwise specified that the call should be in a dependent context).
796Thus a global declaration of such a function must be available, since
797the one in the base class is not visible until instantiation time.  The
798compiler will consequently produce the following error message:
799
800@smallexample
801  x.cc: In member function `int Derived<T>::g()':
802  x.cc:6: error: there are no arguments to `f' that depend on a template
803     parameter, so a declaration of `f' must be available
804  x.cc:6: error: (if you use `-fpermissive', G++ will accept your code, but
805     allowing the use of an undeclared name is deprecated)
806@end smallexample
807
808To make the code valid either use @code{this->f()}, or
809@code{Base<T>::f()}.  Using the @option{-fpermissive} flag will also let
810the compiler accept the code, by marking all function calls for which no
811declaration is visible at the time of definition of the template for
812later lookup at instantiation time, as if it were a dependent call.
813We do not recommend using @option{-fpermissive} to work around invalid
814code, and it will also only catch cases where functions in base classes
815are called, not where variables in base classes are used (as in the
816example above).
817
818Note that some compilers (including G++ versions prior to 3.4) get these
819examples wrong and accept above code without an error.  Those compilers
820do not implement two-stage name lookup correctly.
821
822
823@node Temporaries
824@subsection Temporaries May Vanish Before You Expect
825
826@cindex temporaries, lifetime of
827@cindex portions of temporary objects, pointers to
828It is dangerous to use pointers or references to @emph{portions} of a
829temporary object.  The compiler may very well delete the object before
830you expect it to, leaving a pointer to garbage.  The most common place
831where this problem crops up is in classes like string classes,
832especially ones that define a conversion function to type @code{char *}
833or @code{const char *}---which is one reason why the standard
834@code{string} class requires you to call the @code{c_str} member
835function.  However, any class that returns a pointer to some internal
836structure is potentially subject to this problem.
837
838For example, a program may use a function @code{strfunc} that returns
839@code{string} objects, and another function @code{charfunc} that
840operates on pointers to @code{char}:
841
842@smallexample
843string strfunc ();
844void charfunc (const char *);
845
846void
847f ()
848@{
849  const char *p = strfunc().c_str();
850  @dots{}
851  charfunc (p);
852  @dots{}
853  charfunc (p);
854@}
855@end smallexample
856
857@noindent
858In this situation, it may seem reasonable to save a pointer to the C
859string returned by the @code{c_str} member function and use that rather
860than call @code{c_str} repeatedly.  However, the temporary string
861created by the call to @code{strfunc} is destroyed after @code{p} is
862initialized, at which point @code{p} is left pointing to freed memory.
863
864Code like this may run successfully under some other compilers,
865particularly obsolete cfront-based compilers that delete temporaries
866along with normal local variables.  However, the GNU C++ behavior is
867standard-conforming, so if your program depends on late destruction of
868temporaries it is not portable.
869
870The safe way to write such code is to give the temporary a name, which
871forces it to remain until the end of the scope of the name.  For
872example:
873
874@smallexample
875const string& tmp = strfunc ();
876charfunc (tmp.c_str ());
877@end smallexample
878
879@node Copy Assignment
880@subsection Implicit Copy-Assignment for Virtual Bases
881
882When a base class is virtual, only one subobject of the base class
883belongs to each full object.  Also, the constructors and destructors are
884invoked only once, and called from the most-derived class.  However, such
885objects behave unspecified when being assigned.  For example:
886
887@smallexample
888struct Base@{
889  char *name;
890  Base(char *n) : name(strdup(n))@{@}
891  Base& operator= (const Base& other)@{
892   free (name);
893   name = strdup (other.name);
894  @}
895@};
896
897struct A:virtual Base@{
898  int val;
899  A():Base("A")@{@}
900@};
901
902struct B:virtual Base@{
903  int bval;
904  B():Base("B")@{@}
905@};
906
907struct Derived:public A, public B@{
908  Derived():Base("Derived")@{@}
909@};
910
911void func(Derived &d1, Derived &d2)
912@{
913  d1 = d2;
914@}
915@end smallexample
916
917The C++ standard specifies that @samp{Base::Base} is only called once
918when constructing or copy-constructing a Derived object.  It is
919unspecified whether @samp{Base::operator=} is called more than once when
920the implicit copy-assignment for Derived objects is invoked (as it is
921inside @samp{func} in the example).
922
923G++ implements the ``intuitive'' algorithm for copy-assignment: assign all
924direct bases, then assign all members.  In that algorithm, the virtual
925base subobject can be encountered more than once.  In the example, copying
926proceeds in the following order: @samp{val}, @samp{name} (via
927@code{strdup}), @samp{bval}, and @samp{name} again.
928
929If application code relies on copy-assignment, a user-defined
930copy-assignment operator removes any uncertainties.  With such an
931operator, the application can define whether and how the virtual base
932subobject is assigned.
933
934@node Non-bugs
935@section Certain Changes We Don't Want to Make
936
937This section lists changes that people frequently request, but which
938we do not make because we think GCC is better without them.
939
940@itemize @bullet
941@item
942Checking the number and type of arguments to a function which has an
943old-fashioned definition and no prototype.
944
945Such a feature would work only occasionally---only for calls that appear
946in the same file as the called function, following the definition.  The
947only way to check all calls reliably is to add a prototype for the
948function.  But adding a prototype eliminates the motivation for this
949feature.  So the feature is not worthwhile.
950
951@item
952Warning about using an expression whose type is signed as a shift count.
953
954Shift count operands are probably signed more often than unsigned.
955Warning about this would cause far more annoyance than good.
956
957@item
958Warning about assigning a signed value to an unsigned variable.
959
960Such assignments must be very common; warning about them would cause
961more annoyance than good.
962
963@item
964Warning when a non-void function value is ignored.
965
966C contains many standard functions that return a value that most
967programs choose to ignore.  One obvious example is @code{printf}.
968Warning about this practice only leads the defensive programmer to
969clutter programs with dozens of casts to @code{void}.  Such casts are
970required so frequently that they become visual noise.  Writing those
971casts becomes so automatic that they no longer convey useful
972information about the intentions of the programmer.  For functions
973where the return value should never be ignored, use the
974@code{warn_unused_result} function attribute (@pxref{Function
975Attributes}).
976
977@item
978@opindex fshort-enums
979Making @option{-fshort-enums} the default.
980
981This would cause storage layout to be incompatible with most other C
982compilers.  And it doesn't seem very important, given that you can get
983the same result in other ways.  The case where it matters most is when
984the enumeration-valued object is inside a structure, and in that case
985you can specify a field width explicitly.
986
987@item
988Making bit-fields unsigned by default on particular machines where ``the
989ABI standard'' says to do so.
990
991The ISO C standard leaves it up to the implementation whether a bit-field
992declared plain @code{int} is signed or not.  This in effect creates two
993alternative dialects of C@.
994
995@opindex fsigned-bitfields
996@opindex funsigned-bitfields
997The GNU C compiler supports both dialects; you can specify the signed
998dialect with @option{-fsigned-bitfields} and the unsigned dialect with
999@option{-funsigned-bitfields}.  However, this leaves open the question of
1000which dialect to use by default.
1001
1002Currently, the preferred dialect makes plain bit-fields signed, because
1003this is simplest.  Since @code{int} is the same as @code{signed int} in
1004every other context, it is cleanest for them to be the same in bit-fields
1005as well.
1006
1007Some computer manufacturers have published Application Binary Interface
1008standards which specify that plain bit-fields should be unsigned.  It is
1009a mistake, however, to say anything about this issue in an ABI@.  This is
1010because the handling of plain bit-fields distinguishes two dialects of C@.
1011Both dialects are meaningful on every type of machine.  Whether a
1012particular object file was compiled using signed bit-fields or unsigned
1013is of no concern to other object files, even if they access the same
1014bit-fields in the same data structures.
1015
1016A given program is written in one or the other of these two dialects.
1017The program stands a chance to work on most any machine if it is
1018compiled with the proper dialect.  It is unlikely to work at all if
1019compiled with the wrong dialect.
1020
1021Many users appreciate the GNU C compiler because it provides an
1022environment that is uniform across machines.  These users would be
1023inconvenienced if the compiler treated plain bit-fields differently on
1024certain machines.
1025
1026Occasionally users write programs intended only for a particular machine
1027type.  On these occasions, the users would benefit if the GNU C compiler
1028were to support by default the same dialect as the other compilers on
1029that machine.  But such applications are rare.  And users writing a
1030program to run on more than one type of machine cannot possibly benefit
1031from this kind of compatibility.
1032
1033This is why GCC does and will treat plain bit-fields in the same
1034fashion on all types of machines (by default).
1035
1036There are some arguments for making bit-fields unsigned by default on all
1037machines.  If, for example, this becomes a universal de facto standard,
1038it would make sense for GCC to go along with it.  This is something
1039to be considered in the future.
1040
1041(Of course, users strongly concerned about portability should indicate
1042explicitly in each bit-field whether it is signed or not.  In this way,
1043they write programs which have the same meaning in both C dialects.)
1044
1045@item
1046@opindex ansi
1047@opindex std
1048Undefining @code{__STDC__} when @option{-ansi} is not used.
1049
1050Currently, GCC defines @code{__STDC__} unconditionally.  This provides
1051good results in practice.
1052
1053Programmers normally use conditionals on @code{__STDC__} to ask whether
1054it is safe to use certain features of ISO C, such as function
1055prototypes or ISO token concatenation.  Since plain @command{gcc} supports
1056all the features of ISO C, the correct answer to these questions is
1057``yes''.
1058
1059Some users try to use @code{__STDC__} to check for the availability of
1060certain library facilities.  This is actually incorrect usage in an ISO
1061C program, because the ISO C standard says that a conforming
1062freestanding implementation should define @code{__STDC__} even though it
1063does not have the library facilities.  @samp{gcc -ansi -pedantic} is a
1064conforming freestanding implementation, and it is therefore required to
1065define @code{__STDC__}, even though it does not come with an ISO C
1066library.
1067
1068Sometimes people say that defining @code{__STDC__} in a compiler that
1069does not completely conform to the ISO C standard somehow violates the
1070standard.  This is illogical.  The standard is a standard for compilers
1071that claim to support ISO C, such as @samp{gcc -ansi}---not for other
1072compilers such as plain @command{gcc}.  Whatever the ISO C standard says
1073is relevant to the design of plain @command{gcc} without @option{-ansi} only
1074for pragmatic reasons, not as a requirement.
1075
1076GCC normally defines @code{__STDC__} to be 1, and in addition
1077defines @code{__STRICT_ANSI__} if you specify the @option{-ansi} option,
1078or a @option{-std} option for strict conformance to some version of ISO C@.
1079On some hosts, system include files use a different convention, where
1080@code{__STDC__} is normally 0, but is 1 if the user specifies strict
1081conformance to the C Standard.  GCC follows the host convention when
1082processing system include files, but when processing user files it follows
1083the usual GNU C convention.
1084
1085@item
1086Undefining @code{__STDC__} in C++.
1087
1088Programs written to compile with C++-to-C translators get the
1089value of @code{__STDC__} that goes with the C compiler that is
1090subsequently used.  These programs must test @code{__STDC__}
1091to determine what kind of C preprocessor that compiler uses:
1092whether they should concatenate tokens in the ISO C fashion
1093or in the traditional fashion.
1094
1095These programs work properly with GNU C++ if @code{__STDC__} is defined.
1096They would not work otherwise.
1097
1098In addition, many header files are written to provide prototypes in ISO
1099C but not in traditional C@.  Many of these header files can work without
1100change in C++ provided @code{__STDC__} is defined.  If @code{__STDC__}
1101is not defined, they will all fail, and will all need to be changed to
1102test explicitly for C++ as well.
1103
1104@item
1105Deleting ``empty'' loops.
1106
1107Historically, GCC has not deleted ``empty'' loops under the
1108assumption that the most likely reason you would put one in a program is
1109to have a delay, so deleting them will not make real programs run any
1110faster.
1111
1112However, the rationale here is that optimization of a nonempty loop
1113cannot produce an empty one. This held for carefully written C compiled
1114with less powerful optimizers but is not always the case for carefully
1115written C++ or with more powerful optimizers.
1116Thus GCC will remove operations from loops whenever it can determine
1117those operations are not externally visible (apart from the time taken
1118to execute them, of course).  In case the loop can be proved to be finite,
1119GCC will also remove the loop itself.
1120
1121Be aware of this when performing timing tests, for instance the
1122following loop can be completely removed, provided
1123@code{some_expression} can provably not change any global state.
1124
1125@smallexample
1126@{
1127   int sum = 0;
1128   int ix;
1129
1130   for (ix = 0; ix != 10000; ix++)
1131      sum += some_expression;
1132@}
1133@end smallexample
1134
1135Even though @code{sum} is accumulated in the loop, no use is made of
1136that summation, so the accumulation can be removed.
1137
1138@item
1139Making side effects happen in the same order as in some other compiler.
1140
1141@cindex side effects, order of evaluation
1142@cindex order of evaluation, side effects
1143It is never safe to depend on the order of evaluation of side effects.
1144For example, a function call like this may very well behave differently
1145from one compiler to another:
1146
1147@smallexample
1148void func (int, int);
1149
1150int i = 2;
1151func (i++, i++);
1152@end smallexample
1153
1154There is no guarantee (in either the C or the C++ standard language
1155definitions) that the increments will be evaluated in any particular
1156order.  Either increment might happen first.  @code{func} might get the
1157arguments @samp{2, 3}, or it might get @samp{3, 2}, or even @samp{2, 2}.
1158
1159@item
1160Making certain warnings into errors by default.
1161
1162Some ISO C testsuites report failure when the compiler does not produce
1163an error message for a certain program.
1164
1165@opindex pedantic-errors
1166ISO C requires a ``diagnostic'' message for certain kinds of invalid
1167programs, but a warning is defined by GCC to count as a diagnostic.  If
1168GCC produces a warning but not an error, that is correct ISO C support.
1169If testsuites call this ``failure'', they should be run with the GCC
1170option @option{-pedantic-errors}, which will turn these warnings into
1171errors.
1172
1173@end itemize
1174
1175@node Warnings and Errors
1176@section Warning Messages and Error Messages
1177
1178@cindex error messages
1179@cindex warnings vs errors
1180@cindex messages, warning and error
1181The GNU compiler can produce two kinds of diagnostics: errors and
1182warnings.  Each kind has a different purpose:
1183
1184@itemize @w{}
1185@item
1186@dfn{Errors} report problems that make it impossible to compile your
1187program.  GCC reports errors with the source file name and line
1188number where the problem is apparent.
1189
1190@item
1191@dfn{Warnings} report other unusual conditions in your code that
1192@emph{may} indicate a problem, although compilation can (and does)
1193proceed.  Warning messages also report the source file name and line
1194number, but include the text @samp{warning:} to distinguish them
1195from error messages.
1196@end itemize
1197
1198Warnings may indicate danger points where you should check to make sure
1199that your program really does what you intend; or the use of obsolete
1200features; or the use of nonstandard features of GNU C or C++.  Many
1201warnings are issued only if you ask for them, with one of the @option{-W}
1202options (for instance, @option{-Wall} requests a variety of useful
1203warnings).
1204
1205@opindex pedantic
1206@opindex pedantic-errors
1207GCC always tries to compile your program if possible; it never
1208gratuitously rejects a program whose meaning is clear merely because
1209(for instance) it fails to conform to a standard.  In some cases,
1210however, the C and C++ standards specify that certain extensions are
1211forbidden, and a diagnostic @emph{must} be issued by a conforming
1212compiler.  The @option{-pedantic} option tells GCC to issue warnings in
1213such cases; @option{-pedantic-errors} says to make them errors instead.
1214This does not mean that @emph{all} non-ISO constructs get warnings
1215or errors.
1216
1217@xref{Warning Options,,Options to Request or Suppress Warnings}, for
1218more detail on these and related command-line options.
1219