* Compiler bug or illegal code for entry_family?
@ 2004-03-31 10:38 Lutz Donnerhacke
2004-03-31 11:26 ` Egil H. H�vik
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Lutz Donnerhacke @ 2004-03-31 10:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
procedure gnat_gigi_116 is
type Entries is range 1 .. 16;
protected type X is
entry Call(Entries);
end X;
protected body X is
entry Call(for e in Entries)
when True is
i : Entries := e;
begin
null;
end Call;
end X;
begin
null;
end gnat_gigi_116;
\f
gcc -c gnat_gigi_116.adb
+===========================GNAT BUG DETECTED==============================+
| 3.3.2 (i686-pc-linux-gnu) Gigi abort, Code=116 |
| Error detected at gnat_gigi_116.adb:11:24 |
| Please submit a bug report; see http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html. |
| Include the entire contents of this bug box in the report. |
| Include the exact gcc or gnatmake command that you entered. |
| Also include sources listed below in gnatchop format |
| concatenated together with no headers between files. |
+==========================================================================+
Please include these source files with error report
gnat_gigi_116.adb
compilation abandoned
gnatmake: "gnat_gigi_116.adb" compilation error
\f
Should I submit a bug report or fix my code?
Obvious fix:
procedure gnat_gigi_116 is
type Entries is range 1 .. 16;
protected type X is
entry Call(Entries)(i : Entries);
end X;
protected body X is
entry Call(for e in Entries)(i : Entries)
when True is
begin
null;
end Call;
end X;
begin
null;
end gnat_gigi_116;
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: Compiler bug or illegal code for entry_family?
2004-03-31 10:38 Compiler bug or illegal code for entry_family? Lutz Donnerhacke
@ 2004-03-31 11:26 ` Egil H. H�vik
2004-03-31 11:34 ` Lutz Donnerhacke
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Egil H. H�vik @ 2004-03-31 11:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
"Lutz Donnerhacke" <lutz@iks-jena.de> wrote in message
news:slrnc6l7tq.nu.lutz@taranis.iks-jena.de...
> procedure gnat_gigi_116 is
>
<snip>
>
> Should I submit a bug report or fix my code?
This is a bug, and has been fixed in newer versions of gnat
(at least in 3.16a1 and 5.01a)
> Obvious fix:
an even more obvious fix:
> procedure gnat_gigi_116 is
> type Entries is range 1 .. 16;
>
> protected type X is
entry Call(Entries);
> end X;
>
> protected body X is
entry Call(for e in Entries)
> when True is
i : Entries;
> begin
i := e;
> end Call;
> end X;
> begin
> null;
> end gnat_gigi_116;
~egilhh
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: Compiler bug or illegal code for entry_family?
2004-03-31 11:26 ` Egil H. H�vik
@ 2004-03-31 11:34 ` Lutz Donnerhacke
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Lutz Donnerhacke @ 2004-03-31 11:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
* Egil H. H�vik wrote:
>> protected body X is
> entry Call(for e in Entries)
>> when True is
> i : Entries;
>> begin
> i := e;
>> end Call;
Many thanks! It works fine.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-03-31 11:34 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2004-03-31 10:38 Compiler bug or illegal code for entry_family? Lutz Donnerhacke
2004-03-31 11:26 ` Egil H. H�vik
2004-03-31 11:34 ` Lutz Donnerhacke
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox