1 @c Copyright (C) 1988, 1989, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998,
2 @c 1999, 2000, 2001, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 Free Software Foundation,
4 @c This is part of the GCC manual.
5 @c For copying conditions, see the file gcc.texi.
8 @chapter Known Causes of Trouble with GCC
10 @cindex installation trouble
11 @cindex known causes of trouble
13 This section describes known problems that affect users of GCC@. Most
14 of these are not GCC bugs per se---if they were, we would fix them.
15 But the result for a user may be like the result of a bug.
17 Some of these problems are due to bugs in other software, some are
18 missing features that are too much work to add, and some are places
19 where people's opinions differ as to what is best.
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 * Protoize Caveats:: Things to watch out for when using @code{protoize}.
34 * Non-bugs:: Things we think are right, but some others disagree.
35 * Warnings and Errors:: Which problems in your code get warnings,
40 @section Actual Bugs We Haven't Fixed Yet
44 The @code{fixincludes} script interacts badly with automounters; if the
45 directory of system header files is automounted, it tends to be
46 unmounted while @code{fixincludes} is running. This would seem to be a
47 bug in the automounter. We don't know any good way to work around it.
50 The @code{fixproto} script will sometimes add prototypes for the
51 @code{sigsetjmp} and @code{siglongjmp} functions that reference the
52 @code{jmp_buf} type before that type is defined. To work around this,
53 edit the offending file and place the typedef in front of the
57 @node Cross-Compiler Problems
58 @section Cross-Compiler Problems
60 You may run into problems with cross compilation on certain machines,
65 At present, the program @file{mips-tfile} which adds debug
66 support to object files on MIPS systems does not work in a cross
71 @section Interoperation
73 This section lists various difficulties encountered in using GCC
74 together with other compilers or with the assemblers, linkers,
75 libraries and debuggers on certain systems.
79 On many platforms, GCC supports a different ABI for C++ than do other
80 compilers, so the object files compiled by GCC cannot be used with object
81 files generated by another C++ compiler.
83 An area where the difference is most apparent is name mangling. The use
84 of different name mangling is intentional, to protect you from more subtle
86 Compilers differ as to many internal details of C++ implementation,
87 including: how class instances are laid out, how multiple inheritance is
88 implemented, and how virtual function calls are handled. If the name
89 encoding were made the same, your programs would link against libraries
90 provided from other compilers---but the programs would then crash when
91 run. Incompatible libraries are then detected at link time, rather than
95 On some BSD systems, including some versions of Ultrix, use of profiling
96 causes static variable destructors (currently used only in C++) not to
100 On some SGI systems, when you use @option{-lgl_s} as an option,
101 it gets translated magically to @samp{-lgl_s -lX11_s -lc_s}.
102 Naturally, this does not happen when you use GCC@.
103 You must specify all three options explicitly.
106 On a SPARC, GCC aligns all values of type @code{double} on an 8-byte
107 boundary, and it expects every @code{double} to be so aligned. The Sun
108 compiler usually gives @code{double} values 8-byte alignment, with one
109 exception: function arguments of type @code{double} may not be aligned.
111 As a result, if a function compiled with Sun CC takes the address of an
112 argument of type @code{double} and passes this pointer of type
113 @code{double *} to a function compiled with GCC, dereferencing the
114 pointer may cause a fatal signal.
116 One way to solve this problem is to compile your entire program with GCC@.
117 Another solution is to modify the function that is compiled with
118 Sun CC to copy the argument into a local variable; local variables
119 are always properly aligned. A third solution is to modify the function
120 that uses the pointer to dereference it via the following function
121 @code{access_double} instead of directly with @samp{*}:
125 access_double (double *unaligned_ptr)
127 union d2i @{ double d; int i[2]; @};
129 union d2i *p = (union d2i *) unaligned_ptr;
140 Storing into the pointer can be done likewise with the same union.
143 On Solaris, the @code{malloc} function in the @file{libmalloc.a} library
144 may allocate memory that is only 4 byte aligned. Since GCC on the
145 SPARC assumes that doubles are 8 byte aligned, this may result in a
146 fatal signal if doubles are stored in memory allocated by the
147 @file{libmalloc.a} library.
149 The solution is to not use the @file{libmalloc.a} library. Use instead
150 @code{malloc} and related functions from @file{libc.a}; they do not have
154 On the HP PA machine, ADB sometimes fails to work on functions compiled
155 with GCC@. Specifically, it fails to work on functions that use
156 @code{alloca} or variable-size arrays. This is because GCC doesn't
157 generate HP-UX unwind descriptors for such functions. It may even be
158 impossible to generate them.
161 Debugging (@option{-g}) is not supported on the HP PA machine, unless you use
162 the preliminary GNU tools.
165 Taking the address of a label may generate errors from the HP-UX
166 PA assembler. GAS for the PA does not have this problem.
169 Using floating point parameters for indirect calls to static functions
170 will not work when using the HP assembler. There simply is no way for GCC
171 to specify what registers hold arguments for static functions when using
172 the HP assembler. GAS for the PA does not have this problem.
175 In extremely rare cases involving some very large functions you may
176 receive errors from the HP linker complaining about an out of bounds
177 unconditional branch offset. This used to occur more often in previous
178 versions of GCC, but is now exceptionally rare. If you should run
179 into it, you can work around by making your function smaller.
182 GCC compiled code sometimes emits warnings from the HP-UX assembler of
186 (warning) Use of GR3 when
187 frame >= 8192 may cause conflict.
190 These warnings are harmless and can be safely ignored.
193 In extremely rare cases involving some very large functions you may
194 receive errors from the AIX Assembler complaining about a displacement
195 that is too large. If you should run into it, you can work around by
196 making your function smaller.
199 The @file{libstdc++.a} library in GCC relies on the SVR4 dynamic
200 linker semantics which merges global symbols between libraries and
201 applications, especially necessary for C++ streams functionality.
202 This is not the default behavior of AIX shared libraries and dynamic
203 linking. @file{libstdc++.a} is built on AIX with ``runtime-linking''
204 enabled so that symbol merging can occur. To utilize this feature,
205 the application linked with @file{libstdc++.a} must include the
206 @option{-Wl,-brtl} flag on the link line. G++ cannot impose this
207 because this option may interfere with the semantics of the user
208 program and users may not always use @samp{g++} to link his or her
209 application. Applications are not required to use the
210 @option{-Wl,-brtl} flag on the link line---the rest of the
211 @file{libstdc++.a} library which is not dependent on the symbol
212 merging semantics will continue to function correctly.
215 An application can interpose its own definition of functions for
216 functions invoked by @file{libstdc++.a} with ``runtime-linking''
217 enabled on AIX@. To accomplish this the application must be linked
218 with ``runtime-linking'' option and the functions explicitly must be
219 exported by the application (@option{-Wl,-brtl,-bE:exportfile}).
222 AIX on the RS/6000 provides support (NLS) for environments outside of
223 the United States. Compilers and assemblers use NLS to support
224 locale-specific representations of various objects including
225 floating-point numbers (@samp{.} vs @samp{,} for separating decimal
226 fractions). There have been problems reported where the library linked
227 with GCC does not produce the same floating-point formats that the
228 assembler accepts. If you have this problem, set the @env{LANG}
229 environment variable to @samp{C} or @samp{En_US}.
232 @opindex fdollars-in-identifiers
233 Even if you specify @option{-fdollars-in-identifiers},
234 you cannot successfully use @samp{$} in identifiers on the RS/6000 due
235 to a restriction in the IBM assembler. GAS supports these
240 @node Incompatibilities
241 @section Incompatibilities of GCC
242 @cindex incompatibilities of GCC
245 There are several noteworthy incompatibilities between GNU C and K&R
246 (non-ISO) versions of C@.
249 @cindex string constants
250 @cindex read-only strings
251 @cindex shared strings
253 GCC normally makes string constants read-only. If several
254 identical-looking string constants are used, GCC stores only one
257 @cindex @code{mktemp}, and constant strings
258 One consequence is that you cannot call @code{mktemp} with a string
259 constant argument. The function @code{mktemp} always alters the
260 string its argument points to.
262 @cindex @code{sscanf}, and constant strings
263 @cindex @code{fscanf}, and constant strings
264 @cindex @code{scanf}, and constant strings
265 Another consequence is that @code{sscanf} does not work on some very
266 old systems when passed a string constant as its format control string
267 or input. This is because @code{sscanf} incorrectly tries to write
268 into the string constant. Likewise @code{fscanf} and @code{scanf}.
270 The solution to these problems is to change the program to use
271 @code{char}-array variables with initialization strings for these
272 purposes instead of string constants.
275 @code{-2147483648} is positive.
277 This is because 2147483648 cannot fit in the type @code{int}, so
278 (following the ISO C rules) its data type is @code{unsigned long int}.
279 Negating this value yields 2147483648 again.
282 GCC does not substitute macro arguments when they appear inside of
283 string constants. For example, the following macro in GCC
290 will produce output @code{"a"} regardless of what the argument @var{a} is.
292 @cindex @code{setjmp} incompatibilities
293 @cindex @code{longjmp} incompatibilities
295 When you use @code{setjmp} and @code{longjmp}, the only automatic
296 variables guaranteed to remain valid are those declared
297 @code{volatile}. This is a consequence of automatic register
298 allocation. Consider this function:
312 /* @r{@code{longjmp (j)} may occur in @code{fun3}.} */
317 Here @code{a} may or may not be restored to its first value when the
318 @code{longjmp} occurs. If @code{a} is allocated in a register, then
319 its first value is restored; otherwise, it keeps the last value stored
323 If you use the @option{-W} option with the @option{-O} option, you will
324 get a warning when GCC thinks such a problem might be possible.
327 Programs that use preprocessing directives in the middle of macro
328 arguments do not work with GCC@. For example, a program like this
339 ISO C does not permit such a construct.
342 K&R compilers allow comments to cross over an inclusion boundary
343 (i.e.@: started in an include file and ended in the including file).
345 @cindex external declaration scope
346 @cindex scope of external declarations
347 @cindex declaration scope
349 Declarations of external variables and functions within a block apply
350 only to the block containing the declaration. In other words, they
351 have the same scope as any other declaration in the same place.
353 In some other C compilers, a @code{extern} declaration affects all the
354 rest of the file even if it happens within a block.
357 In traditional C, you can combine @code{long}, etc., with a typedef name,
362 typedef long foo bar;
365 In ISO C, this is not allowed: @code{long} and other type modifiers
366 require an explicit @code{int}.
368 @cindex typedef names as function parameters
370 PCC allows typedef names to be used as function parameters.
373 Traditional C allows the following erroneous pair of declarations to
374 appear together in a given scope:
382 GCC treats all characters of identifiers as significant. According to
383 K&R-1 (2.2), ``No more than the first eight characters are significant,
384 although more may be used.''. Also according to K&R-1 (2.2), ``An
385 identifier is a sequence of letters and digits; the first character must
386 be a letter. The underscore _ counts as a letter.'', but GCC also
387 allows dollar signs in identifiers.
391 PCC allows whitespace in the middle of compound assignment operators
392 such as @samp{+=}. GCC, following the ISO standard, does not
398 GCC complains about unterminated character constants inside of
399 preprocessing conditionals that fail. Some programs have English
400 comments enclosed in conditionals that are guaranteed to fail; if these
401 comments contain apostrophes, GCC will probably report an error. For
402 example, this code would produce an error:
406 You can't expect this to work.
410 The best solution to such a problem is to put the text into an actual
411 C comment delimited by @samp{/*@dots{}*/}.
414 Many user programs contain the declaration @samp{long time ();}. In the
415 past, the system header files on many systems did not actually declare
416 @code{time}, so it did not matter what type your program declared it to
417 return. But in systems with ISO C headers, @code{time} is declared to
418 return @code{time_t}, and if that is not the same as @code{long}, then
419 @samp{long time ();} is erroneous.
421 The solution is to change your program to use appropriate system headers
422 (@code{<time.h>} on systems with ISO C headers) and not to declare
423 @code{time} if the system header files declare it, or failing that to
424 use @code{time_t} as the return type of @code{time}.
426 @cindex @code{float} as function value type
428 When compiling functions that return @code{float}, PCC converts it to
429 a double. GCC actually returns a @code{float}. If you are concerned
430 with PCC compatibility, you should declare your functions to return
431 @code{double}; you might as well say what you mean.
436 When compiling functions that return structures or unions, GCC
437 output code normally uses a method different from that used on most
438 versions of Unix. As a result, code compiled with GCC cannot call
439 a structure-returning function compiled with PCC, and vice versa.
441 The method used by GCC is as follows: a structure or union which is
442 1, 2, 4 or 8 bytes long is returned like a scalar. A structure or union
443 with any other size is stored into an address supplied by the caller
444 (usually in a special, fixed register, but on some machines it is passed
445 on the stack). The target hook @code{TARGET_STRUCT_VALUE_RTX}
446 tells GCC where to pass this address.
448 By contrast, PCC on most target machines returns structures and unions
449 of any size by copying the data into an area of static storage, and then
450 returning the address of that storage as if it were a pointer value.
451 The caller must copy the data from that memory area to the place where
452 the value is wanted. GCC does not use this method because it is
453 slower and nonreentrant.
455 On some newer machines, PCC uses a reentrant convention for all
456 structure and union returning. GCC on most of these machines uses a
457 compatible convention when returning structures and unions in memory,
458 but still returns small structures and unions in registers.
460 @opindex fpcc-struct-return
461 You can tell GCC to use a compatible convention for all structure and
462 union returning with the option @option{-fpcc-struct-return}.
464 @cindex preprocessing tokens
465 @cindex preprocessing numbers
467 GCC complains about program fragments such as @samp{0x74ae-0x4000}
468 which appear to be two hexadecimal constants separated by the minus
469 operator. Actually, this string is a single @dfn{preprocessing token}.
470 Each such token must correspond to one token in C@. Since this does not,
471 GCC prints an error message. Although it may appear obvious that what
472 is meant is an operator and two values, the ISO C standard specifically
473 requires that this be treated as erroneous.
475 A @dfn{preprocessing token} is a @dfn{preprocessing number} if it
476 begins with a digit and is followed by letters, underscores, digits,
477 periods and @samp{e+}, @samp{e-}, @samp{E+}, @samp{E-}, @samp{p+},
478 @samp{p-}, @samp{P+}, or @samp{P-} character sequences. (In strict C89
479 mode, the sequences @samp{p+}, @samp{p-}, @samp{P+} and @samp{P-} cannot
480 appear in preprocessing numbers.)
482 To make the above program fragment valid, place whitespace in front of
483 the minus sign. This whitespace will end the preprocessing number.
487 @section Fixed Header Files
489 GCC needs to install corrected versions of some system header files.
490 This is because most target systems have some header files that won't
491 work with GCC unless they are changed. Some have bugs, some are
492 incompatible with ISO C, and some depend on special features of other
495 Installing GCC automatically creates and installs the fixed header
496 files, by running a program called @code{fixincludes}. Normally, you
497 don't need to pay attention to this. But there are cases where it
498 doesn't do the right thing automatically.
502 If you update the system's header files, such as by installing a new
503 system version, the fixed header files of GCC are not automatically
504 updated. They can be updated using the @command{mkheaders} script
506 @file{@var{libexecdir}/gcc/@var{target}/@var{version}/install-tools/}.
509 On some systems, header file directories contain
510 machine-specific symbolic links in certain places. This makes it
511 possible to share most of the header files among hosts running the
512 same version of the system on different machine models.
514 The programs that fix the header files do not understand this special
515 way of using symbolic links; therefore, the directory of fixed header
516 files is good only for the machine model used to build it.
518 It is possible to make separate sets of fixed header files for the
519 different machine models, and arrange a structure of symbolic links so
520 as to use the proper set, but you'll have to do this by hand.
523 @node Standard Libraries
524 @section Standard Libraries
527 GCC by itself attempts to be a conforming freestanding implementation.
528 @xref{Standards,,Language Standards Supported by GCC}, for details of
529 what this means. Beyond the library facilities required of such an
530 implementation, the rest of the C library is supplied by the vendor of
531 the operating system. If that C library doesn't conform to the C
532 standards, then your programs might get warnings (especially when using
533 @option{-Wall}) that you don't expect.
535 For example, the @code{sprintf} function on SunOS 4.1.3 returns
536 @code{char *} while the C standard says that @code{sprintf} returns an
537 @code{int}. The @code{fixincludes} program could make the prototype for
538 this function match the Standard, but that would be wrong, since the
539 function will still return @code{char *}.
541 If you need a Standard compliant library, then you need to find one, as
542 GCC does not provide one. The GNU C library (called @code{glibc})
543 provides ISO C, POSIX, BSD, SystemV and X/Open compatibility for
544 GNU/Linux and HURD-based GNU systems; no recent version of it supports
545 other systems, though some very old versions did. Version 2.2 of the
546 GNU C library includes nearly complete C99 support. You could also ask
547 your operating system vendor if newer libraries are available.
549 @node Disappointments
550 @section Disappointments and Misunderstandings
552 These problems are perhaps regrettable, but we don't know any practical
557 Certain local variables aren't recognized by debuggers when you compile
560 This occurs because sometimes GCC optimizes the variable out of
561 existence. There is no way to tell the debugger how to compute the
562 value such a variable ``would have had'', and it is not clear that would
563 be desirable anyway. So GCC simply does not mention the eliminated
564 variable when it writes debugging information.
566 You have to expect a certain amount of disagreement between the
567 executable and your source code, when you use optimization.
569 @cindex conflicting types
570 @cindex scope of declaration
572 Users often think it is a bug when GCC reports an error for code
576 int foo (struct mumble *);
578 struct mumble @{ @dots{} @};
580 int foo (struct mumble *x)
584 This code really is erroneous, because the scope of @code{struct
585 mumble} in the prototype is limited to the argument list containing it.
586 It does not refer to the @code{struct mumble} defined with file scope
587 immediately below---they are two unrelated types with similar names in
590 But in the definition of @code{foo}, the file-scope type is used
591 because that is available to be inherited. Thus, the definition and
592 the prototype do not match, and you get an error.
594 This behavior may seem silly, but it's what the ISO standard specifies.
595 It is easy enough for you to make your code work by moving the
596 definition of @code{struct mumble} above the prototype. It's not worth
597 being incompatible with ISO C just to avoid an error for the example
601 Accesses to bit-fields even in volatile objects works by accessing larger
602 objects, such as a byte or a word. You cannot rely on what size of
603 object is accessed in order to read or write the bit-field; it may even
604 vary for a given bit-field according to the precise usage.
606 If you care about controlling the amount of memory that is accessed, use
607 volatile but do not use bit-fields.
610 GCC comes with shell scripts to fix certain known problems in system
611 header files. They install corrected copies of various header files in
612 a special directory where only GCC will normally look for them. The
613 scripts adapt to various systems by searching all the system header
614 files for the problem cases that we know about.
616 If new system header files are installed, nothing automatically arranges
617 to update the corrected header files. They can be updated using the
618 @command{mkheaders} script installed in
619 @file{@var{libexecdir}/gcc/@var{target}/@var{version}/install-tools/}.
622 @cindex floating point precision
623 On 68000 and x86 systems, for instance, you can get paradoxical results
624 if you test the precise values of floating point numbers. For example,
625 you can find that a floating point value which is not a NaN is not equal
626 to itself. This results from the fact that the floating point registers
627 hold a few more bits of precision than fit in a @code{double} in memory.
628 Compiled code moves values between memory and floating point registers
629 at its convenience, and moving them into memory truncates them.
631 @opindex ffloat-store
632 You can partially avoid this problem by using the @option{-ffloat-store}
633 option (@pxref{Optimize Options}).
636 On AIX and other platforms without weak symbol support, templates
637 need to be instantiated explicitly and symbols for static members
638 of templates will not be generated.
641 On AIX, GCC scans object files and library archives for static
642 constructors and destructors when linking an application before the
643 linker prunes unreferenced symbols. This is necessary to prevent the
644 AIX linker from mistakenly assuming that static constructor or
645 destructor are unused and removing them before the scanning can occur.
646 All static constructors and destructors found will be referenced even
647 though the modules in which they occur may not be used by the program.
648 This may lead to both increased executable size and unexpected symbol
652 @node C++ Misunderstandings
653 @section Common Misunderstandings with GNU C++
655 @cindex misunderstandings in C++
656 @cindex surprises in C++
657 @cindex C++ misunderstandings
658 C++ is a complex language and an evolving one, and its standard
659 definition (the ISO C++ standard) was only recently completed. As a
660 result, your C++ compiler may occasionally surprise you, even when its
661 behavior is correct. This section discusses some areas that frequently
662 give rise to questions of this sort.
665 * Static Definitions:: Static member declarations are not definitions
666 * Name lookup:: Name lookup, templates, and accessing members of base classes
667 * Temporaries:: Temporaries may vanish before you expect
668 * Copy Assignment:: Copy Assignment operators copy virtual bases twice
671 @node Static Definitions
672 @subsection Declare @emph{and} Define Static Members
674 @cindex C++ static data, declaring and defining
675 @cindex static data in C++, declaring and defining
676 @cindex declaring static data in C++
677 @cindex defining static data in C++
678 When a class has static data members, it is not enough to @emph{declare}
679 the static member; you must also @emph{define} it. For example:
690 This declaration only establishes that the class @code{Foo} has an
691 @code{int} named @code{Foo::bar}, and a member function named
692 @code{Foo::method}. But you still need to define @emph{both}
693 @code{method} and @code{bar} elsewhere. According to the ISO
694 standard, you must supply an initializer in one (and only one) source
701 Other C++ compilers may not correctly implement the standard behavior.
702 As a result, when you switch to @command{g++} from one of these compilers,
703 you may discover that a program that appeared to work correctly in fact
704 does not conform to the standard: @command{g++} reports as undefined
705 symbols any static data members that lack definitions.
709 @subsection Name lookup, templates, and accessing members of base classes
711 @cindex base class members
712 @cindex two-stage name lookup
713 @cindex dependent name lookup
715 The C++ standard prescribes that all names that are not dependent on
716 template parameters are bound to their present definitions when parsing
717 a template function or class.@footnote{The C++ standard just uses the
718 term ``dependent'' for names that depend on the type or value of
719 template parameters. This shorter term will also be used in the rest of
720 this section.} Only names that are dependent are looked up at the point
721 of instantiation. For example, consider
727 template <typename T>
740 Here, the names @code{foo} and @code{N} appear in a context that does
741 not depend on the type of @code{T}. The compiler will thus require that
742 they are defined in the context of use in the template, not only before
743 the point of instantiation, and will here use @code{::foo(double)} and
744 @code{A::N}, respectively. In particular, it will convert the integer
745 value to a @code{double} when passing it to @code{::foo(double)}.
747 Conversely, @code{bar} and the call to @code{foo} in the fourth marked
748 line are used in contexts that do depend on the type of @code{T}, so
749 they are only looked up at the point of instantiation, and you can
750 provide declarations for them after declaring the template, but before
751 instantiating it. In particular, if you instantiate @code{A::f<int>},
752 the last line will call an overloaded @code{::foo(int)} if one was
753 provided, even if after the declaration of @code{struct A}.
755 This distinction between lookup of dependent and non-dependent names is
756 called two-stage (or dependent) name lookup. G++ implements it
759 Two-stage name lookup sometimes leads to situations with behavior
760 different from non-template codes. The most common is probably this:
763 template <typename T> struct Base @{
767 template <typename T> struct Derived : public Base<T> @{
768 int get_i() @{ return i; @}
772 In @code{get_i()}, @code{i} is not used in a dependent context, so the
773 compiler will look for a name declared at the enclosing namespace scope
774 (which is the global scope here). It will not look into the base class,
775 since that is dependent and you may declare specializations of
776 @code{Base} even after declaring @code{Derived}, so the compiler can't
777 really know what @code{i} would refer to. If there is no global
778 variable @code{i}, then you will get an error message.
780 In order to make it clear that you want the member of the base class,
781 you need to defer lookup until instantiation time, at which the base
782 class is known. For this, you need to access @code{i} in a dependent
783 context, by either using @code{this->i} (remember that @code{this} is of
784 type @code{Derived<T>*}, so is obviously dependent), or using
785 @code{Base<T>::i}. Alternatively, @code{Base<T>::i} might be brought
786 into scope by a @code{using}-declaration.
788 Another, similar example involves calling member functions of a base
792 template <typename T> struct Base @{
796 template <typename T> struct Derived : Base<T> @{
797 int g() @{ return f(); @};
801 Again, the call to @code{f()} is not dependent on template arguments
802 (there are no arguments that depend on the type @code{T}, and it is also
803 not otherwise specified that the call should be in a dependent context).
804 Thus a global declaration of such a function must be available, since
805 the one in the base class is not visible until instantiation time. The
806 compiler will consequently produce the following error message:
809 x.cc: In member function `int Derived<T>::g()':
810 x.cc:6: error: there are no arguments to `f' that depend on a template
811 parameter, so a declaration of `f' must be available
812 x.cc:6: error: (if you use `-fpermissive', G++ will accept your code, but
813 allowing the use of an undeclared name is deprecated)
816 To make the code valid either use @code{this->f()}, or
817 @code{Base<T>::f()}. Using the @option{-fpermissive} flag will also let
818 the compiler accept the code, by marking all function calls for which no
819 declaration is visible at the time of definition of the template for
820 later lookup at instantiation time, as if it were a dependent call.
821 We do not recommend using @option{-fpermissive} to work around invalid
822 code, and it will also only catch cases where functions in base classes
823 are called, not where variables in base classes are used (as in the
826 Note that some compilers (including G++ versions prior to 3.4) get these
827 examples wrong and accept above code without an error. Those compilers
828 do not implement two-stage name lookup correctly.
832 @subsection Temporaries May Vanish Before You Expect
834 @cindex temporaries, lifetime of
835 @cindex portions of temporary objects, pointers to
836 It is dangerous to use pointers or references to @emph{portions} of a
837 temporary object. The compiler may very well delete the object before
838 you expect it to, leaving a pointer to garbage. The most common place
839 where this problem crops up is in classes like string classes,
840 especially ones that define a conversion function to type @code{char *}
841 or @code{const char *}---which is one reason why the standard
842 @code{string} class requires you to call the @code{c_str} member
843 function. However, any class that returns a pointer to some internal
844 structure is potentially subject to this problem.
846 For example, a program may use a function @code{strfunc} that returns
847 @code{string} objects, and another function @code{charfunc} that
848 operates on pointers to @code{char}:
852 void charfunc (const char *);
857 const char *p = strfunc().c_str();
866 In this situation, it may seem reasonable to save a pointer to the C
867 string returned by the @code{c_str} member function and use that rather
868 than call @code{c_str} repeatedly. However, the temporary string
869 created by the call to @code{strfunc} is destroyed after @code{p} is
870 initialized, at which point @code{p} is left pointing to freed memory.
872 Code like this may run successfully under some other compilers,
873 particularly obsolete cfront-based compilers that delete temporaries
874 along with normal local variables. However, the GNU C++ behavior is
875 standard-conforming, so if your program depends on late destruction of
876 temporaries it is not portable.
878 The safe way to write such code is to give the temporary a name, which
879 forces it to remain until the end of the scope of the name. For
883 const string& tmp = strfunc ();
884 charfunc (tmp.c_str ());
887 @node Copy Assignment
888 @subsection Implicit Copy-Assignment for Virtual Bases
890 When a base class is virtual, only one subobject of the base class
891 belongs to each full object. Also, the constructors and destructors are
892 invoked only once, and called from the most-derived class. However, such
893 objects behave unspecified when being assigned. For example:
898 Base(char *n) : name(strdup(n))@{@}
899 Base& operator= (const Base& other)@{
901 name = strdup (other.name);
905 struct A:virtual Base@{
910 struct B:virtual Base@{
915 struct Derived:public A, public B@{
916 Derived():Base("Derived")@{@}
919 void func(Derived &d1, Derived &d2)
925 The C++ standard specifies that @samp{Base::Base} is only called once
926 when constructing or copy-constructing a Derived object. It is
927 unspecified whether @samp{Base::operator=} is called more than once when
928 the implicit copy-assignment for Derived objects is invoked (as it is
929 inside @samp{func} in the example).
931 G++ implements the ``intuitive'' algorithm for copy-assignment: assign all
932 direct bases, then assign all members. In that algorithm, the virtual
933 base subobject can be encountered more than once. In the example, copying
934 proceeds in the following order: @samp{val}, @samp{name} (via
935 @code{strdup}), @samp{bval}, and @samp{name} again.
937 If application code relies on copy-assignment, a user-defined
938 copy-assignment operator removes any uncertainties. With such an
939 operator, the application can define whether and how the virtual base
940 subobject is assigned.
942 @node Protoize Caveats
943 @section Caveats of using @command{protoize}
945 The conversion programs @command{protoize} and @command{unprotoize} can
946 sometimes change a source file in a way that won't work unless you
951 @command{protoize} can insert references to a type name or type tag before
952 the definition, or in a file where they are not defined.
954 If this happens, compiler error messages should show you where the new
955 references are, so fixing the file by hand is straightforward.
958 There are some C constructs which @command{protoize} cannot figure out.
959 For example, it can't determine argument types for declaring a
960 pointer-to-function variable; this you must do by hand. @command{protoize}
961 inserts a comment containing @samp{???} each time it finds such a
962 variable; so you can find all such variables by searching for this
963 string. ISO C does not require declaring the argument types of
964 pointer-to-function types.
967 Using @command{unprotoize} can easily introduce bugs. If the program
968 relied on prototypes to bring about conversion of arguments, these
969 conversions will not take place in the program without prototypes.
970 One case in which you can be sure @command{unprotoize} is safe is when
971 you are removing prototypes that were made with @command{protoize}; if
972 the program worked before without any prototypes, it will work again
975 @opindex Wtraditional-conversion
976 You can find all the places where this problem might occur by compiling
977 the program with the @option{-Wtraditional-conversion} option. It
978 prints a warning whenever an argument is converted.
981 Both conversion programs can be confused if there are macro calls in and
982 around the text to be converted. In other words, the standard syntax
983 for a declaration or definition must not result from expanding a macro.
984 This problem is inherent in the design of C and cannot be fixed. If
985 only a few functions have confusing macro calls, you can easily convert
989 @command{protoize} cannot get the argument types for a function whose
990 definition was not actually compiled due to preprocessing conditionals.
991 When this happens, @command{protoize} changes nothing in regard to such
992 a function. @command{protoize} tries to detect such instances and warn
995 You can generally work around this problem by using @command{protoize} step
996 by step, each time specifying a different set of @option{-D} options for
997 compilation, until all of the functions have been converted. There is
998 no automatic way to verify that you have got them all, however.
1001 Confusion may result if there is an occasion to convert a function
1002 declaration or definition in a region of source code where there is more
1003 than one formal parameter list present. Thus, attempts to convert code
1004 containing multiple (conditionally compiled) versions of a single
1005 function header (in the same vicinity) may not produce the desired (or
1008 If you plan on converting source files which contain such code, it is
1009 recommended that you first make sure that each conditionally compiled
1010 region of source code which contains an alternative function header also
1011 contains at least one additional follower token (past the final right
1012 parenthesis of the function header). This should circumvent the
1016 @command{unprotoize} can become confused when trying to convert a function
1017 definition or declaration which contains a declaration for a
1018 pointer-to-function formal argument which has the same name as the
1019 function being defined or declared. We recommend you avoid such choices
1020 of formal parameter names.
1023 You might also want to correct some of the indentation by hand and break
1024 long lines. (The conversion programs don't write lines longer than
1025 eighty characters in any case.)
1029 @section Certain Changes We Don't Want to Make
1031 This section lists changes that people frequently request, but which
1032 we do not make because we think GCC is better without them.
1036 Checking the number and type of arguments to a function which has an
1037 old-fashioned definition and no prototype.
1039 Such a feature would work only occasionally---only for calls that appear
1040 in the same file as the called function, following the definition. The
1041 only way to check all calls reliably is to add a prototype for the
1042 function. But adding a prototype eliminates the motivation for this
1043 feature. So the feature is not worthwhile.
1046 Warning about using an expression whose type is signed as a shift count.
1048 Shift count operands are probably signed more often than unsigned.
1049 Warning about this would cause far more annoyance than good.
1052 Warning about assigning a signed value to an unsigned variable.
1054 Such assignments must be very common; warning about them would cause
1055 more annoyance than good.
1058 Warning when a non-void function value is ignored.
1060 C contains many standard functions that return a value that most
1061 programs choose to ignore. One obvious example is @code{printf}.
1062 Warning about this practice only leads the defensive programmer to
1063 clutter programs with dozens of casts to @code{void}. Such casts are
1064 required so frequently that they become visual noise. Writing those
1065 casts becomes so automatic that they no longer convey useful
1066 information about the intentions of the programmer. For functions
1067 where the return value should never be ignored, use the
1068 @code{warn_unused_result} function attribute (@pxref{Function
1072 @opindex fshort-enums
1073 Making @option{-fshort-enums} the default.
1075 This would cause storage layout to be incompatible with most other C
1076 compilers. And it doesn't seem very important, given that you can get
1077 the same result in other ways. The case where it matters most is when
1078 the enumeration-valued object is inside a structure, and in that case
1079 you can specify a field width explicitly.
1082 Making bit-fields unsigned by default on particular machines where ``the
1083 ABI standard'' says to do so.
1085 The ISO C standard leaves it up to the implementation whether a bit-field
1086 declared plain @code{int} is signed or not. This in effect creates two
1087 alternative dialects of C@.
1089 @opindex fsigned-bitfields
1090 @opindex funsigned-bitfields
1091 The GNU C compiler supports both dialects; you can specify the signed
1092 dialect with @option{-fsigned-bitfields} and the unsigned dialect with
1093 @option{-funsigned-bitfields}. However, this leaves open the question of
1094 which dialect to use by default.
1096 Currently, the preferred dialect makes plain bit-fields signed, because
1097 this is simplest. Since @code{int} is the same as @code{signed int} in
1098 every other context, it is cleanest for them to be the same in bit-fields
1101 Some computer manufacturers have published Application Binary Interface
1102 standards which specify that plain bit-fields should be unsigned. It is
1103 a mistake, however, to say anything about this issue in an ABI@. This is
1104 because the handling of plain bit-fields distinguishes two dialects of C@.
1105 Both dialects are meaningful on every type of machine. Whether a
1106 particular object file was compiled using signed bit-fields or unsigned
1107 is of no concern to other object files, even if they access the same
1108 bit-fields in the same data structures.
1110 A given program is written in one or the other of these two dialects.
1111 The program stands a chance to work on most any machine if it is
1112 compiled with the proper dialect. It is unlikely to work at all if
1113 compiled with the wrong dialect.
1115 Many users appreciate the GNU C compiler because it provides an
1116 environment that is uniform across machines. These users would be
1117 inconvenienced if the compiler treated plain bit-fields differently on
1120 Occasionally users write programs intended only for a particular machine
1121 type. On these occasions, the users would benefit if the GNU C compiler
1122 were to support by default the same dialect as the other compilers on
1123 that machine. But such applications are rare. And users writing a
1124 program to run on more than one type of machine cannot possibly benefit
1125 from this kind of compatibility.
1127 This is why GCC does and will treat plain bit-fields in the same
1128 fashion on all types of machines (by default).
1130 There are some arguments for making bit-fields unsigned by default on all
1131 machines. If, for example, this becomes a universal de facto standard,
1132 it would make sense for GCC to go along with it. This is something
1133 to be considered in the future.
1135 (Of course, users strongly concerned about portability should indicate
1136 explicitly in each bit-field whether it is signed or not. In this way,
1137 they write programs which have the same meaning in both C dialects.)
1142 Undefining @code{__STDC__} when @option{-ansi} is not used.
1144 Currently, GCC defines @code{__STDC__} unconditionally. This provides
1145 good results in practice.
1147 Programmers normally use conditionals on @code{__STDC__} to ask whether
1148 it is safe to use certain features of ISO C, such as function
1149 prototypes or ISO token concatenation. Since plain @command{gcc} supports
1150 all the features of ISO C, the correct answer to these questions is
1153 Some users try to use @code{__STDC__} to check for the availability of
1154 certain library facilities. This is actually incorrect usage in an ISO
1155 C program, because the ISO C standard says that a conforming
1156 freestanding implementation should define @code{__STDC__} even though it
1157 does not have the library facilities. @samp{gcc -ansi -pedantic} is a
1158 conforming freestanding implementation, and it is therefore required to
1159 define @code{__STDC__}, even though it does not come with an ISO C
1162 Sometimes people say that defining @code{__STDC__} in a compiler that
1163 does not completely conform to the ISO C standard somehow violates the
1164 standard. This is illogical. The standard is a standard for compilers
1165 that claim to support ISO C, such as @samp{gcc -ansi}---not for other
1166 compilers such as plain @command{gcc}. Whatever the ISO C standard says
1167 is relevant to the design of plain @command{gcc} without @option{-ansi} only
1168 for pragmatic reasons, not as a requirement.
1170 GCC normally defines @code{__STDC__} to be 1, and in addition
1171 defines @code{__STRICT_ANSI__} if you specify the @option{-ansi} option,
1172 or a @option{-std} option for strict conformance to some version of ISO C@.
1173 On some hosts, system include files use a different convention, where
1174 @code{__STDC__} is normally 0, but is 1 if the user specifies strict
1175 conformance to the C Standard. GCC follows the host convention when
1176 processing system include files, but when processing user files it follows
1177 the usual GNU C convention.
1180 Undefining @code{__STDC__} in C++.
1182 Programs written to compile with C++-to-C translators get the
1183 value of @code{__STDC__} that goes with the C compiler that is
1184 subsequently used. These programs must test @code{__STDC__}
1185 to determine what kind of C preprocessor that compiler uses:
1186 whether they should concatenate tokens in the ISO C fashion
1187 or in the traditional fashion.
1189 These programs work properly with GNU C++ if @code{__STDC__} is defined.
1190 They would not work otherwise.
1192 In addition, many header files are written to provide prototypes in ISO
1193 C but not in traditional C@. Many of these header files can work without
1194 change in C++ provided @code{__STDC__} is defined. If @code{__STDC__}
1195 is not defined, they will all fail, and will all need to be changed to
1196 test explicitly for C++ as well.
1199 Deleting ``empty'' loops.
1201 Historically, GCC has not deleted ``empty'' loops under the
1202 assumption that the most likely reason you would put one in a program is
1203 to have a delay, so deleting them will not make real programs run any
1206 However, the rationale here is that optimization of a nonempty loop
1207 cannot produce an empty one. This held for carefully written C compiled
1208 with less powerful optimizers but is not always the case for carefully
1209 written C++ or with more powerful optimizers.
1210 Thus GCC will remove operations from loops whenever it can determine
1211 those operations are not externally visible (apart from the time taken
1212 to execute them, of course). In case the loop can be proved to be finite,
1213 GCC will also remove the loop itself.
1215 Be aware of this when performing timing tests, for instance the
1216 following loop can be completely removed, provided
1217 @code{some_expression} can provably not change any global state.
1224 for (ix = 0; ix != 10000; ix++)
1225 sum += some_expression;
1229 Even though @code{sum} is accumulated in the loop, no use is made of
1230 that summation, so the accumulation can be removed.
1233 Making side effects happen in the same order as in some other compiler.
1235 @cindex side effects, order of evaluation
1236 @cindex order of evaluation, side effects
1237 It is never safe to depend on the order of evaluation of side effects.
1238 For example, a function call like this may very well behave differently
1239 from one compiler to another:
1242 void func (int, int);
1248 There is no guarantee (in either the C or the C++ standard language
1249 definitions) that the increments will be evaluated in any particular
1250 order. Either increment might happen first. @code{func} might get the
1251 arguments @samp{2, 3}, or it might get @samp{3, 2}, or even @samp{2, 2}.
1254 Making certain warnings into errors by default.
1256 Some ISO C testsuites report failure when the compiler does not produce
1257 an error message for a certain program.
1259 @opindex pedantic-errors
1260 ISO C requires a ``diagnostic'' message for certain kinds of invalid
1261 programs, but a warning is defined by GCC to count as a diagnostic. If
1262 GCC produces a warning but not an error, that is correct ISO C support.
1263 If testsuites call this ``failure'', they should be run with the GCC
1264 option @option{-pedantic-errors}, which will turn these warnings into
1269 @node Warnings and Errors
1270 @section Warning Messages and Error Messages
1272 @cindex error messages
1273 @cindex warnings vs errors
1274 @cindex messages, warning and error
1275 The GNU compiler can produce two kinds of diagnostics: errors and
1276 warnings. Each kind has a different purpose:
1280 @dfn{Errors} report problems that make it impossible to compile your
1281 program. GCC reports errors with the source file name and line
1282 number where the problem is apparent.
1285 @dfn{Warnings} report other unusual conditions in your code that
1286 @emph{may} indicate a problem, although compilation can (and does)
1287 proceed. Warning messages also report the source file name and line
1288 number, but include the text @samp{warning:} to distinguish them
1289 from error messages.
1292 Warnings may indicate danger points where you should check to make sure
1293 that your program really does what you intend; or the use of obsolete
1294 features; or the use of nonstandard features of GNU C or C++. Many
1295 warnings are issued only if you ask for them, with one of the @option{-W}
1296 options (for instance, @option{-Wall} requests a variety of useful
1300 @opindex pedantic-errors
1301 GCC always tries to compile your program if possible; it never
1302 gratuitously rejects a program whose meaning is clear merely because
1303 (for instance) it fails to conform to a standard. In some cases,
1304 however, the C and C++ standards specify that certain extensions are
1305 forbidden, and a diagnostic @emph{must} be issued by a conforming
1306 compiler. The @option{-pedantic} option tells GCC to issue warnings in
1307 such cases; @option{-pedantic-errors} says to make them errors instead.
1308 This does not mean that @emph{all} non-ISO constructs get warnings
1311 @xref{Warning Options,,Options to Request or Suppress Warnings}, for
1312 more detail on these and related command-line options.