By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
448,507 Members | 1,200 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 448,507 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

g++ sucks: internal compiler error???

P: n/a
Hello,

Allow me to share my frustrations with GNU g++. This is the second
time something similar happens to me: I can't find anything wrong with
my C++ program and yet I get segfaults, and eventually, here is what
happens. Anyone ever experience anything similar. This or similar
untrackable problems happen to me whenever I write a large class...
anyone have had similar experiences???

make
g++ -c matrix.cpp -Wall -g
matrix.cpp: In member function `void
Matrix::computeDistShortest(bool)':
matrix.cpp:189: internal compiler error: in find_function_data, at
function.c:
313
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See <URL:http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla> for instructions.
Preprocessed source stored into /tmp/ccf7vSby.out file, please attach
this to your bugreport
make: *** [matrix.o] Error 1
Jul 22 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
30 Replies


P: n/a
"Neil Zanella" <nz******@cs.mun.ca> wrote in message
news:b6**************************@posting.google.c om...
Hello,

Allow me to share my frustrations with GNU g++. This is the second
time something similar happens to me: I can't find anything wrong with my C++ program and yet I get segfaults, and eventually, here is what
happens. Anyone ever experience anything similar. This or similar
untrackable problems happen to me whenever I write a large class...
anyone have had similar experiences???


1. Post a code sample.
2. say what version of g++ you are using.

All compilers occasionally give internal errors. If you are using a
recent version, it is likely that there is an error in your code which
g++ doesn't know how to diagnose. Try compiling on at least one other
compiler. When you find out what's tripping up g++, you, or someone in
this group, can probably find a workaround.

Jonathan
Jul 22 '05 #2

P: n/a

"Neil Zanella" <nz******@cs.mun.ca> wrote in message
news:b6**************************@posting.google.c om...
Hello,

Allow me to share my frustrations with GNU g++. This is the second
time something similar happens to me: I can't find anything wrong with
my C++ program and yet I get segfaults
Almost certainly bugs in your program. g++ isn't bug free of course, but it
isn't a buggy program either.

What is it they say about tools and bad workmen?
, and eventually, here is what
happens. Anyone ever experience anything similar. This or similar
untrackable problems happen to me whenever I write a large class...
Write smaller classes.
anyone have had similar experiences???

Only on a different compiler. On that compiler an internal compiler error
almost always indicated a syntax error in some complex language construct.
In your case I would guess some syntax error in an extremely large class
might be the cause.
make
g++ -c matrix.cpp -Wall -g
matrix.cpp: In member function `void
Matrix::computeDistShortest(bool)':
matrix.cpp:189: internal compiler error: in find_function_data, at
function.c:
313


Why not share the code. No-one can offer any useful help without it. Before
posting the code however, take the time to cut out the parts that are not
contributing to the error. This sort of methodical approach might help you
figure out the cause of the error in which case you would have learned
something valuable, if it doesn't then you at least will be posting less
code here and are more likely to get help.

john
Jul 22 '05 #3

P: n/a

"Jonathan Turkanis" <te******@kangaroologic.com> wrote in message
news:c4*************@ID-216073.news.uni-berlin.de...
"Neil Zanella" <nz******@cs.mun.ca> wrote in message
news:b6**************************@posting.google.c om...
Hello,
compiler. When you find out what's tripping up g++, you, or someone in this group, can probably find a workaround.


I mean IF it turns out to be a real problems with g++, and not with
your code.

Jonathan
Jul 22 '05 #4

P: n/a
Neil Zanella wrote:

Hello,

Allow me to share my frustrations with GNU g++. This is the second
time something similar happens to me: I can't find anything wrong with
my C++ program and yet I get segfaults, and eventually, here is what
happens. Anyone ever experience anything similar. This or similar
untrackable problems happen to me whenever I write a large class...
anyone have had similar experiences???

make
g++ -c matrix.cpp -Wall -g
matrix.cpp: In member function `void
Matrix::computeDistShortest(bool)':
matrix.cpp:189: internal compiler error: in find_function_data, at
function.c:
313
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See <URL:http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla> for instructions.
Preprocessed source stored into /tmp/ccf7vSby.out file, please attach
this to your bugreport
make: *** [matrix.o] Error 1

Hey, Neil,

Do a web search on netiquette, especially for usenet.
You might be extremely frustrated, but to say that
g++ sucks when it is a free compiler that serves
many people well is not the best way to present
yourself to the world. Sorry, I don't have an
answer to your problem, but I'm trying to help
out by helping you post in a way that might get
more people to help.

Fred
--
Fred Ma
Dept. of Electronics, Carleton University
1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, Ontario
Canada, K1S 5B6
Jul 22 '05 #5

P: n/a
"Jonathan Turkanis" <te******@kangaroologic.com> wrote in message
news:c4*************@ID-216073.news.uni-berlin.de...
"Jonathan Turkanis" <te******@kangaroologic.com> wrote in message
news:c4*************@ID-216073.news.uni-berlin.de...
"Neil Zanella" <nz******@cs.mun.ca> wrote in message
news:b6**************************@posting.google.c om...
Hello,

compiler. When you find out what's tripping up g++, you, or someone

in
this group, can probably find a workaround.


I mean IF it turns out to be a real problems with g++, and not with
your code.


An internal compiler error is *always* a real problem with the
compiler, not with user code. Perhaps the compiler is just a
sucker for a syntax error, but that still makes it a sucker.

P.J. Plauger
Dinkumware, Ltd.
http://www.dinkumware.com
Jul 22 '05 #6

P: n/a
Neil Zanella wrote:
Hello,

Allow me to share my frustrations with GNU g++.
Why don't you do that in gnu.g++.help?
This is the second time something similar happens to me: I can't find
anything wrong with my C++ program and yet I get segfaults, and
eventually, here is what happens. Anyone ever experience anything
similar. This or similar untrackable problems happen to me whenever I
write a large class...
anyone have had similar experiences???
Until now only with "gcc" 2.96, which is not a gcc release, but rather
an infamous fork by RedHat. The early versions of this one gave me real
headaches, crashing often.
make
g++ -c matrix.cpp -Wall -g
matrix.cpp: In member function `void
Matrix::computeDistShortest(bool)':
matrix.cpp:189: internal compiler error: in find_function_data, at
function.c:
313
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See <URL:http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla> for instructions.
Preprocessed source stored into /tmp/ccf7vSby.out file, please attach
this to your bugreport
make: *** [matrix.o] Error 1


And now what? You discovered a bug. Compilers, just like all programs,
are not perfect. Did you consider reporting the bug?

Jul 22 '05 #7

P: n/a
P.J. Plauger wrote:
An internal compiler error is *always* a real problem with the
compiler, not with user code.


Well, the OP wrote that he gets segfaults and *eventually*
the compiler gives him the internal error. If the segfaults
are *his* program crashing, he might well have undefined
behaviour by then, which obviously includes having all
subsequent compilatons fail due to mystical internal errors.

Just a possibility, of course.

- J.
Jul 22 '05 #8

P: n/a
On Thu, 01 Apr 2004 22:49:47 -0800, Neil Zanella wrote:

OT in c.l.c++ Crossposted and followups set. Leaving all of the original
message for the benefit of the people in gnu.g++.help
Hello,

Allow me to share my frustrations with GNU g++. This is the second
time something similar happens to me: I can't find anything wrong with
my C++ program and yet I get segfaults, and eventually, here is what
happens. Anyone ever experience anything similar. This or similar
untrackable problems happen to me whenever I write a large class...
anyone have had similar experiences???

make
g++ -c matrix.cpp -Wall -g
matrix.cpp: In member function `void
Matrix::computeDistShortest(bool)':
matrix.cpp:189: internal compiler error: in find_function_data, at
function.c:
313
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See <URL:http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla> for instructions.
Preprocessed source stored into /tmp/ccf7vSby.out file, please attach
this to your bugreport
make: *** [matrix.o] Error 1


Is the error always at the same place? If yes submit a bug report (after
having searched known bugs) if you can make a minimal example that shows
the problem I'm sure the gcc guys will appreciate it.

If the error happens at different places when compiling identical code I'd
also run checks on the hardware. (eg memcheck86 (correct name?)).
Compilation is pretty heavy on the machine and if you have dodgy memory,
dodgy cpu (overheating?) or other problems that's when they are most
likely to show up.

--
NPV

"the large print giveth, and the small print taketh away"
Tom Waits - Step right up

Jul 22 '05 #9

P: n/a
"Jacek Dziedzic" <ja*************@janowo.net> wrote in message
news:c4**********@korweta.task.gda.pl...
P.J. Plauger wrote:
An internal compiler error is *always* a real problem with the
compiler, not with user code.


Well, the OP wrote that he gets segfaults and *eventually*
the compiler gives him the internal error. If the segfaults
are *his* program crashing, he might well have undefined
behaviour by then, which obviously includes having all
subsequent compilatons fail due to mystical internal errors.

Just a possibility, of course.


Uh, we're talking compile time, long before his program runs.
If the segfaults are *the compiler* crashing, that's a real
problem with the compiler, not with user code. It's a problem
even worse than an ICE.

Why all this effort to apologize for a compiler bug? I've
seen them in all compilers, from time to time. Some compilers
crash more often than others, but all do so. Nothing alters
the fact that a compiler is obliged to survive any kind of
input, without crashing and without reporting an internal
compiler error.

P.J. Plauger
Dinkumware, Ltd.
http://www.dinkumware.com
Jul 22 '05 #10

P: n/a
An internal compiler error is *always* a real problem with the
compiler, not with user code. Perhaps the compiler is just a
sucker for a syntax error, but that still makes it a sucker.

P.J. Plauger
Dinkumware, Ltd.
http://www.dinkumware.com

Thank you.

Jul 22 '05 #11

P: n/a
On Fri, 02 Apr 2004 08:27:25 GMT, "P.J. Plauger" <pj*@dinkumware.com>
wrote:
"Jonathan Turkanis" <te******@kangaroologic.com> wrote in message
news:c4*************@ID-216073.news.uni-berlin.de...
"Jonathan Turkanis" <te******@kangaroologic.com> wrote in message
news:c4*************@ID-216073.news.uni-berlin.de...
> "Neil Zanella" <nz******@cs.mun.ca> wrote in message
> news:b6**************************@posting.google.c om...
> > Hello,

> compiler. When you find out what's tripping up g++, you, or someone

in
> this group, can probably find a workaround.


I mean IF it turns out to be a real problems with g++, and not with
your code.


An internal compiler error is *always* a real problem with the
compiler, not with user code. Perhaps the compiler is just a
sucker for a syntax error, but that still makes it a sucker.

P.J. Plauger
Dinkumware, Ltd.
http://www.dinkumware.com


Of course, but I get the feeling the poster was trying to say that
erroneous code can "help" a buggy compiler to manifest its bugginess (as I
have no doubt you knew). Sometimes that compiler bugginess can work in a
user's favor (although not in this case, since gcc is free...)

When I was working at CUJ, we used a relatively early version of the
Informix 4GL compiler for SCO Xenix. It was the buggiest compiler I've ever
used, just dumping core left and right when it came across common syntax
errors, and Informix wasn't bothering to fix it because Xenix was fading
into oblivion (although it sure rocked in its day...) So we bitched and
moaned to Informix until, to shut us up, they sent us a free copy of their
debugger-equipped interpretive 4GL system, just so we'd have something
that could diagnose the syntax errors in the code! Once we fixed those
errors, the compiler had a lot less indigestion. And we got a nice debugger
out of it that we couldn't have had otherwise without purchasing that other
package ;-)
-leor

--
Leor Zolman --- BD Software --- www.bdsoft.com
On-Site Training in C/C++, Java, Perl and Unix
C++ users: Download BD Software's free STL Error Message Decryptor at:
www.bdsoft.com/tools/stlfilt.html
Jul 22 '05 #12

P: n/a

"P.J. Plauger" <pj*@dinkumware.com> wrote in message
news:Nt*******************@nwrddc03.gnilink.net...
"Jonathan Turkanis" <te******@kangaroologic.com> wrote in message
news:c4*************@ID-216073.news.uni-berlin.de...
"Jonathan Turkanis" <te******@kangaroologic.com> wrote in message
news:c4*************@ID-216073.news.uni-berlin.de...
"Neil Zanella" <nz******@cs.mun.ca> wrote in message
news:b6**************************@posting.google.c om...
> Hello,

compiler. When you find out what's tripping up g++, you, or
someone in
this group, can probably find a workaround.


I mean IF it turns out to be a real problems with g++, and not with your code.


An internal compiler error is *always* a real problem with the
compiler, not with user code. Perhaps the compiler is just a
sucker for a syntax error, but that still makes it a sucker.


Yes, I think that's clear. I didn't mean to imply otherwise.

I realized that I might have lest the impression with my first post
that a workaround would be needed if the code contained an error,
which when corrected, allowed the code to compile successfully.

Jonathan
Jul 22 '05 #13

P: n/a

"Leor Zolman" <le**@bdsoft.com> wrote in message
news:j1********************************@4ax.com...
On Fri, 02 Apr 2004 08:27:25 GMT, "P.J. Plauger" <pj*@dinkumware.com> wrote:
"Jonathan Turkanis" <te******@kangaroologic.com> wrote in message
news:c4*************@ID-216073.news.uni-berlin.de...
"Jonathan Turkanis" <te******@kangaroologic.com> wrote in message
news:c4*************@ID-216073.news.uni-berlin.de...
> "Neil Zanella" <nz******@cs.mun.ca> wrote in message
> news:b6**************************@posting.google.c om...
> > Hello,

> compiler. When you find out what's tripping up g++, you, or someone in
> this group, can probably find a workaround.

I mean IF it turns out to be a real problems with g++, and not with your code.
An internal compiler error is *always* a real problem with the
compiler, not with user code. Perhaps the compiler is just a
sucker for a syntax error, but that still makes it a sucker.

P.J. Plauger
Dinkumware, Ltd.
http://www.dinkumware.com


Of course, but I get the feeling the poster was trying to say that
erroneous code can "help" a buggy compiler to manifest its bugginess

(as I have no doubt you knew). Sometimes that compiler bugginess can work in a user's favor (although not in this case, since gcc is free...)


I guess I wasn't very clear. I was just trying to make what I thought
was an obvious point, but might not be to someone who has never seen
an internal compiler error: the internal error, which is clearly a
problem with the compiler, usually goes away when an error is
corrected. The error can often be spotted by using a second or third
compiler. If the code turns out to be correct, there is usually a way
to rewrite the code so that the compiler will accept it.

I've never had an ICE on GCC that didn't represent a problem with my
code. VC6, on the other hand, gives me ICEs all the time with
perfectly correct code, even when I use the standard workarounds.

Jonathan
Jul 22 '05 #14

P: n/a
"Jonathan Turkanis" <te******@kangaroologic.com> wrote
I've never had an ICE on GCC that didn't represent a problem with my
code. VC6, on the other hand, gives me ICEs all the time with
perfectly correct code, even when I use the standard workarounds.


I'd be careful making up abbreviations. An ICE is an in-circuit emulator,
not an internal compiler error. :-)

Claudio Puviani
Jul 22 '05 #15

P: n/a
Jonathan Turkanis wrote:
<snip>
VC6, on the other hand, gives me ICEs all the time with
perfectly correct code, even when I use the standard workarounds.


Why do you expect VC6 to work with code written to the C++ standard, when it
was released before the standard was?
Yes, VC7.0 is inexcusable, but VC7.1 made up for it nicely.

- Pete
Jul 22 '05 #16

P: n/a
Claudio Puviani wrote:
"Jonathan Turkanis" <te******@kangaroologic.com> wrote
I've never had an ICE on GCC that didn't represent a problem with my
code. VC6, on the other hand, gives me ICEs all the time with
perfectly correct code, even when I use the standard workarounds.


I'd be careful making up abbreviations. An ICE is an in-circuit
emulator, not an internal compiler error. :-)


I was thinking of a german high speed train ;-)

Jul 22 '05 #17

P: n/a

"Claudio Puviani" <pu*****@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:a3*********************@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.n et...
"Jonathan Turkanis" <te******@kangaroologic.com> wrote
I've never had an ICE on GCC that didn't represent a problem with my code. VC6, on the other hand, gives me ICEs all the time with
perfectly correct code, even when I use the standard workarounds.
I'd be careful making up abbreviations. An ICE is an in-circuit

emulator, not an internal compiler error. :-)


Also an integral constant expression. I think its clear from context
;-)

Jonathan
Jul 22 '05 #18

P: n/a

"Pete" <x@x.x> wrote in message
news:rg*******************@newsread1.news.pas.eart hlink.net...
Jonathan Turkanis wrote:
<snip>
VC6, on the other hand, gives me ICEs all the time with
perfectly correct code, even when I use the standard workarounds.
Why do you expect VC6 to work with code written to the C++ standard,

when it was released before the standard was?
I don't. But with a little work i can usually make it work.
Yes, VC7.0 is inexcusable, but VC7.1 made up for it nicely.


VC7.1 is my main compiler. But I like my code to work, whenever
possible, on a number of others, including a couple of antique ones
like Borland 5.x and VC6.

Jonathan
Jul 22 '05 #19

P: n/a

"Claudio Puviani" <pu*****@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:a3*********************@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.n et...
"Jonathan Turkanis" <te******@kangaroologic.com> wrote
I've never had an ICE on GCC that didn't represent a problem with my code. VC6, on the other hand, gives me ICEs all the time with
perfectly correct code, even when I use the standard workarounds.
I'd be careful making up abbreviations. An ICE is an in-circuit

emulator, not an internal compiler error. :-)


I just read your post again. I didn't make up ICE -- it's an accepted
abbreviation. See, e.g.,
http://lists.boost.org/MailArchives/boost/msg50047.php

Jonathan
Jul 22 '05 #20

P: n/a
"Jonathan Turkanis" <te******@kangaroologic.com> wrote

I just read your post again. I didn't make up ICE -- it's an
accepted abbreviation. See, e.g.,
http://lists.boost.org/MailArchives/boost/msg50047.php


Um... well, you're just showing me another usenet posting. On usenet
postings, I've seen things like "axe" instead "ask", "your" instead or
"you're" (and vice versa), people calling VAX systems "supercomputers" or
"mainframes" and the list goes on.

As far as computer dictionaries and long-standing common practice go, "ICE"
just doesn't mean "internal compiler error".

But it was clear from the context what you meant, once I reread the sentence
not mentally substituting "in-circuit emulator". :-)

Claudio Puviani
Jul 22 '05 #21

P: n/a

"Claudio Puviani" <pu*****@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Lc*********************@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.n et...
"Jonathan Turkanis" <te******@kangaroologic.com> wrote

I just read your post again. I didn't make up ICE -- it's an
accepted abbreviation. See, e.g.,
http://lists.boost.org/MailArchives/boost/msg50047.php
Um... well, you're just showing me another usenet posting. On usenet
postings, I've seen things like "axe" instead "ask", "your" instead

or "you're" (and vice versa), people calling VAX systems "supercomputers" or "mainframes" and the list goes on.


I don't want to get into an argument here.

I was giving an example to show that 'internal compiler error' is
*one* establied meaning of ICE. You can find lots more on Google:
http://www.google.com/search?q=ICE+%...piler+error%22

Lots of abbreviations have more than one meaning. E.g., PA means
'Peano Arithmetic' to logicians, 'Propositional Attitudes' to
philosophers and 'Pennsylvania' to the US Postal Service.

In my circles, ICE means 'internal compiler error', 'intergral
constant expression' and -- I almost forgot -- 'frozen water'.

Jonathan

Jul 22 '05 #22

P: n/a

Just so you stop this ridiculous and petty thread, look here
http://www.geocities.com/ikind_babel/babel/babel.html#I
See, you're both right. Happy now?
I didn't think so.
Carry on.

Jul 22 '05 #23

P: n/a

"Frederic Banaszak" <ba******@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ql********************************@4ax.com...
Just so you stop this ridiculous and petty thread,
Come on -- I was having fun!
look here
http://www.geocities.com/ikind_babel/babel/babel.html#I


Thanks. Now I can say 'ICE' without feeling like I'm speaking some
strange hillbilly dialect.

Jonathan
Jul 22 '05 #24

P: n/a
<off-topic>

* "Claudio Puviani" <pu*****@hotmail.com> schriebt:

As far as computer dictionaries and long-standing common practice go, "ICE"
just doesn't mean "internal compiler error".


I don't know about the dictionaries but practice is that for programmers
"ICE" does mean "internal compiler error". Also the expression "the compiler
iced" means it crashed or reported an internal error. The g++ compiler team
generally reacts very fast to ICEs, which they provide an effortless way of
reporting; Microsoft, on the other hand, goes out of its way (with dis-info
and such) to make it near to impossible to figure out how to report ICEs, or
in general to report errors with any of their products except auto crash info.

</off-topic>

--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
Jul 22 '05 #25

P: n/a
"Jonathan Turkanis" <te******@kangaroologic.com> wrote in message
I guess I wasn't very clear. I was just trying to make what I thought
was an obvious point, but might not be to someone who has never seen
an internal compiler error: the internal error, which is clearly a
problem with the compiler, usually goes away when an error is
corrected. The error can often be spotted by using a second or third
compiler. If the code turns out to be correct, there is usually a way
to rewrite the code so that the compiler will accept it.

I've never had an ICE on GCC that didn't represent a problem with my
code. VC6, on the other hand, gives me ICEs all the time with
perfectly correct code, even when I use the standard workarounds.

Jonathan


Well, I happened to recompile the code with the same compiler from
Red Hat 9 (and I am running on Fedora Core 1). Nevertheless, the
Red Hat 9 version appears to have some patches in its versioning
string. And on that computer, the code compiles fine. Now, I was
not able to reproduce the error in a smaller example (which,
when doing what appears to be exactly the same thing, does
not crash). I would love to share this compiler bug with
you all, but do you really want me to post 1000 lines of
code simply because I cannot reproduce a smaller file
that produces the same error???

I'm not sure that would be acceptable. When the errors
are not internal, usually, I am able to reproduce them
in smaller code snippets.

Thanks,

Neil
Jul 22 '05 #26

P: n/a

"Neil Zanella" <nz******@cs.mun.ca> wrote in message
news:b6**************************@posting.google.c om...
"Jonathan Turkanis" <te******@kangaroologic.com> wrote in message
Well, I happened to recompile the code with the same compiler from
Red Hat 9 (and I am running on Fedora Core 1). Nevertheless, the
Red Hat 9 version appears to have some patches in its versioning
string. And on that computer, the code compiles fine.
Unfortunately, that's not surprising. Very frustrating, though. I
know it may not be possible in your case, but it might be helpful to
try it on a completely different compiler. Intel, maybe?
Now, I was
not able to reproduce the error in a smaller example (which,
when doing what appears to be exactly the same thing, does
not crash). I would love to share this compiler bug with
you all, but do you really want me to post 1000 lines of
code simply because I cannot reproduce a smaller file
that produces the same error???
I know the feeling. I think I said somewhere in this thread that I've
never had an internal error in g++ that didn't turn out to reflect an
error in my code; with VC6 I often get internal errors from code which
use techniques which I know work in isolation -- putting them all
together causes the ICE. Often there is a large amount of code
involved.

It's a painful process, but I can usually find out what's casuing the
ICE by including headers one at a time. When I find the first header
that causes the error (and verify that none of its includes are
causing the problem) I comment everything out, then uncomment it
systematically until the error resurfaces. Often the error can be
corrected by replacing a small bit of code with code which has exactly
the same meaning but is phrased slightly differently. Occasionally it
has required a substantial redesign. Very rarely I have been unable to
get the compiler to accept any code which does what I want and have
had to abandon my plans.
I'm not sure that would be acceptable. When the errors
are not internal, usually, I am able to reproduce them
in smaller code snippets.


I'd say it's probably against newsgroup policy to post so much code,
but if it's really only 1000 lines, I can't think of anywhere better
than here. I'll look at; but I probably don't have the time or stamina
to track down the error. Someone else might -- perhaps someone who's
had the same problem in the past.

Sorry this thread got so far off track.

Jonathan

Jul 22 '05 #27

P: n/a
Joe
use VC++, gnu is crap

"Neil Zanella" <nz******@cs.mun.ca> wrote in message
news:b6**************************@posting.google.c om...
Hello,

Allow me to share my frustrations with GNU g++. This is the second
time something similar happens to me: I can't find anything wrong with
my C++ program and yet I get segfaults, and eventually, here is what
happens. Anyone ever experience anything similar. This or similar
untrackable problems happen to me whenever I write a large class...
anyone have had similar experiences???

make
g++ -c matrix.cpp -Wall -g
matrix.cpp: In member function `void
Matrix::computeDistShortest(bool)':
matrix.cpp:189: internal compiler error: in find_function_data, at
function.c:
313
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See <URL:http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla> for instructions.
Preprocessed source stored into /tmp/ccf7vSby.out file, please attach
this to your bugreport
make: *** [matrix.o] Error 1

Jul 22 '05 #28

P: n/a
Jonathan Turkanis wrote:
I know the feeling. I think I said somewhere in this thread that I've
never had an internal error in g++ that didn't turn out to reflect an
error in my code;


I have been using GCC for the past 7 years on a daily basis to compile my
own, and other people's code. I cannot count the number of problems I have
had due to a flaw in GCC, because counting begins with 1, and I thus have
no place to begin.

--
p->m == (*p).m == p[0].m
http://www.kdevelop.org
http://www.suse.com
http://www.mozilla.org
Jul 22 '05 #29

P: n/a
> I would love to share this compiler bug with
you all, but do you really want me to post 1000 lines of
code simply because I cannot reproduce a smaller file
that produces the same error???

Then I have to ask. Why did you post? Talk to somebody at work, home
or a bar...
I'm not sure that would be acceptable.


No it wouldn't be nice (I don't think it would be much worse than this
response, though :) ).

JLR
Jul 22 '05 #30

P: n/a
> I would love to share this compiler bug with
you all, but do you really want me to post 1000 lines of
code simply because I cannot reproduce a smaller file
that produces the same error???

Then I have to ask. Why did you post? Talk to somebody at work, home
or a bar...
I'm not sure that would be acceptable.


No it wouldn't be nice (I don't think it would be much worse than this
response, though :) ).

JLR
Jul 22 '05 #31

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.