1 @c Copyright (C) 1988, 1989, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998,
2 @c 1999, 2000, 2001, 2003, 2004 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
3 @c This is part of the GCC manual.
4 @c For copying conditions, see the file gcc.texi.
7 @chapter Known Causes of Trouble with GCC
9 @cindex installation trouble
10 @cindex known causes of trouble
12 This section describes known problems that affect users of GCC@. Most
13 of these are not GCC bugs per se---if they were, we would fix them.
14 But the result for a user may be like the result of a bug.
16 Some of these problems are due to bugs in other software, some are
17 missing features that are too much work to add, and some are places
18 where people's opinions differ as to what is best.
21 * Actual Bugs:: Bugs we will fix later.
22 * Cross-Compiler Problems:: Common problems of cross compiling with GCC.
23 * Interoperation:: Problems using GCC with other compilers,
24 and with certain linkers, assemblers and debuggers.
25 * Incompatibilities:: GCC is incompatible with traditional C.
26 * Fixed Headers:: GCC uses corrected versions of system header files.
27 This is necessary, but doesn't always work smoothly.
28 * Standard Libraries:: GCC uses the system C library, which might not be
29 compliant with the ISO C standard.
30 * Disappointments:: Regrettable things we can't change, but not quite bugs.
31 * C++ Misunderstandings:: Common misunderstandings with GNU C++.
32 * Protoize Caveats:: Things to watch out for when using @code{protoize}.
33 * Non-bugs:: Things we think are right, but some others disagree.
34 * Warnings and Errors:: Which problems in your code get warnings,
39 @section Actual Bugs We Haven't Fixed Yet
43 The @code{fixincludes} script interacts badly with automounters; if the
44 directory of system header files is automounted, it tends to be
45 unmounted while @code{fixincludes} is running. This would seem to be a
46 bug in the automounter. We don't know any good way to work around it.
49 The @code{fixproto} script will sometimes add prototypes for the
50 @code{sigsetjmp} and @code{siglongjmp} functions that reference the
51 @code{jmp_buf} type before that type is defined. To work around this,
52 edit the offending file and place the typedef in front of the
56 @node Cross-Compiler Problems
57 @section Cross-Compiler Problems
59 You may run into problems with cross compilation on certain machines,
64 At present, the program @file{mips-tfile} which adds debug
65 support to object files on MIPS systems does not work in a cross
70 @section Interoperation
72 This section lists various difficulties encountered in using GCC
73 together with other compilers or with the assemblers, linkers,
74 libraries and debuggers on certain systems.
78 On many platforms, GCC supports a different ABI for C++ than do other
79 compilers, so the object files compiled by GCC cannot be used with object
80 files generated by another C++ compiler.
82 An area where the difference is most apparent is name mangling. The use
83 of different name mangling is intentional, to protect you from more subtle
85 Compilers differ as to many internal details of C++ implementation,
86 including: how class instances are laid out, how multiple inheritance is
87 implemented, and how virtual function calls are handled. If the name
88 encoding were made the same, your programs would link against libraries
89 provided from other compilers---but the programs would then crash when
90 run. Incompatible libraries are then detected at link time, rather than
94 On some BSD systems, including some versions of Ultrix, use of profiling
95 causes static variable destructors (currently used only in C++) not to
99 On some SGI systems, when you use @option{-lgl_s} as an option,
100 it gets translated magically to @samp{-lgl_s -lX11_s -lc_s}.
101 Naturally, this does not happen when you use GCC@.
102 You must specify all three options explicitly.
105 On a SPARC, GCC aligns all values of type @code{double} on an 8-byte
106 boundary, and it expects every @code{double} to be so aligned. The Sun
107 compiler usually gives @code{double} values 8-byte alignment, with one
108 exception: function arguments of type @code{double} may not be aligned.
110 As a result, if a function compiled with Sun CC takes the address of an
111 argument of type @code{double} and passes this pointer of type
112 @code{double *} to a function compiled with GCC, dereferencing the
113 pointer may cause a fatal signal.
115 One way to solve this problem is to compile your entire program with GCC@.
116 Another solution is to modify the function that is compiled with
117 Sun CC to copy the argument into a local variable; local variables
118 are always properly aligned. A third solution is to modify the function
119 that uses the pointer to dereference it via the following function
120 @code{access_double} instead of directly with @samp{*}:
124 access_double (double *unaligned_ptr)
126 union d2i @{ double d; int i[2]; @};
128 union d2i *p = (union d2i *) unaligned_ptr;
139 Storing into the pointer can be done likewise with the same union.
142 On Solaris, the @code{malloc} function in the @file{libmalloc.a} library
143 may allocate memory that is only 4 byte aligned. Since GCC on the
144 SPARC assumes that doubles are 8 byte aligned, this may result in a
145 fatal signal if doubles are stored in memory allocated by the
146 @file{libmalloc.a} library.
148 The solution is to not use the @file{libmalloc.a} library. Use instead
149 @code{malloc} and related functions from @file{libc.a}; they do not have
153 On the HP PA machine, ADB sometimes fails to work on functions compiled
154 with GCC@. Specifically, it fails to work on functions that use
155 @code{alloca} or variable-size arrays. This is because GCC doesn't
156 generate HP-UX unwind descriptors for such functions. It may even be
157 impossible to generate them.
160 Debugging (@option{-g}) is not supported on the HP PA machine, unless you use
161 the preliminary GNU tools.
164 Taking the address of a label may generate errors from the HP-UX
165 PA assembler. GAS for the PA does not have this problem.
168 Using floating point parameters for indirect calls to static functions
169 will not work when using the HP assembler. There simply is no way for GCC
170 to specify what registers hold arguments for static functions when using
171 the HP assembler. GAS for the PA does not have this problem.
174 In extremely rare cases involving some very large functions you may
175 receive errors from the HP linker complaining about an out of bounds
176 unconditional branch offset. This used to occur more often in previous
177 versions of GCC, but is now exceptionally rare. If you should run
178 into it, you can work around by making your function smaller.
181 GCC compiled code sometimes emits warnings from the HP-UX assembler of
185 (warning) Use of GR3 when
186 frame >= 8192 may cause conflict.
189 These warnings are harmless and can be safely ignored.
192 In extremely rare cases involving some very large functions you may
193 receive errors from the AIX Assembler complaining about a displacement
194 that is too large. If you should run into it, you can work around by
195 making your function smaller.
198 The @file{libstdc++.a} library in GCC relies on the SVR4 dynamic
199 linker semantics which merges global symbols between libraries and
200 applications, especially necessary for C++ streams functionality.
201 This is not the default behavior of AIX shared libraries and dynamic
202 linking. @file{libstdc++.a} is built on AIX with ``runtime-linking''
203 enabled so that symbol merging can occur. To utilize this feature,
204 the application linked with @file{libstdc++.a} must include the
205 @option{-Wl,-brtl} flag on the link line. G++ cannot impose this
206 because this option may interfere with the semantics of the user
207 program and users may not always use @samp{g++} to link his or her
208 application. Applications are not required to use the
209 @option{-Wl,-brtl} flag on the link line---the rest of the
210 @file{libstdc++.a} library which is not dependent on the symbol
211 merging semantics will continue to function correctly.
214 An application can interpose its own definition of functions for
215 functions invoked by @file{libstdc++.a} with ``runtime-linking''
216 enabled on AIX@. To accomplish this the application must be linked
217 with ``runtime-linking'' option and the functions explicitly must be
218 exported by the application (@option{-Wl,-brtl,-bE:exportfile}).
221 AIX on the RS/6000 provides support (NLS) for environments outside of
222 the United States. Compilers and assemblers use NLS to support
223 locale-specific representations of various objects including
224 floating-point numbers (@samp{.} vs @samp{,} for separating decimal
225 fractions). There have been problems reported where the library linked
226 with GCC does not produce the same floating-point formats that the
227 assembler accepts. If you have this problem, set the @env{LANG}
228 environment variable to @samp{C} or @samp{En_US}.
231 @opindex fdollars-in-identifiers
232 Even if you specify @option{-fdollars-in-identifiers},
233 you cannot successfully use @samp{$} in identifiers on the RS/6000 due
234 to a restriction in the IBM assembler. GAS supports these
237 @cindex VAX calling convention
238 @cindex Ultrix calling convention
241 On Ultrix, the Fortran compiler expects registers 2 through 5 to be saved
242 by function calls. However, the C compiler uses conventions compatible
243 with BSD Unix: registers 2 through 5 may be clobbered by function calls.
245 GCC uses the same convention as the Ultrix C compiler. You can use
246 these options to produce code compatible with the Fortran compiler:
249 -fcall-saved-r2 -fcall-saved-r3 -fcall-saved-r4 -fcall-saved-r5
253 @node Incompatibilities
254 @section Incompatibilities of GCC
255 @cindex incompatibilities of GCC
258 There are several noteworthy incompatibilities between GNU C and K&R
259 (non-ISO) versions of C@.
262 @cindex string constants
263 @cindex read-only strings
264 @cindex shared strings
266 GCC normally makes string constants read-only. If several
267 identical-looking string constants are used, GCC stores only one
270 @cindex @code{mktemp}, and constant strings
271 One consequence is that you cannot call @code{mktemp} with a string
272 constant argument. The function @code{mktemp} always alters the
273 string its argument points to.
275 @cindex @code{sscanf}, and constant strings
276 @cindex @code{fscanf}, and constant strings
277 @cindex @code{scanf}, and constant strings
278 Another consequence is that @code{sscanf} does not work on some very
279 old systems when passed a string constant as its format control string
280 or input. This is because @code{sscanf} incorrectly tries to write
281 into the string constant. Likewise @code{fscanf} and @code{scanf}.
283 The solution to these problems is to change the program to use
284 @code{char}-array variables with initialization strings for these
285 purposes instead of string constants.
288 @code{-2147483648} is positive.
290 This is because 2147483648 cannot fit in the type @code{int}, so
291 (following the ISO C rules) its data type is @code{unsigned long int}.
292 Negating this value yields 2147483648 again.
295 GCC does not substitute macro arguments when they appear inside of
296 string constants. For example, the following macro in GCC
303 will produce output @code{"a"} regardless of what the argument @var{a} is.
305 @cindex @code{setjmp} incompatibilities
306 @cindex @code{longjmp} incompatibilities
308 When you use @code{setjmp} and @code{longjmp}, the only automatic
309 variables guaranteed to remain valid are those declared
310 @code{volatile}. This is a consequence of automatic register
311 allocation. Consider this function:
325 /* @r{@code{longjmp (j)} may occur in @code{fun3}.} */
330 Here @code{a} may or may not be restored to its first value when the
331 @code{longjmp} occurs. If @code{a} is allocated in a register, then
332 its first value is restored; otherwise, it keeps the last value stored
336 If you use the @option{-W} option with the @option{-O} option, you will
337 get a warning when GCC thinks such a problem might be possible.
340 Programs that use preprocessing directives in the middle of macro
341 arguments do not work with GCC@. For example, a program like this
352 ISO C does not permit such a construct.
355 K&R compilers allow comments to cross over an inclusion boundary
356 (i.e.@: started in an include file and ended in the including file).
358 @cindex external declaration scope
359 @cindex scope of external declarations
360 @cindex declaration scope
362 Declarations of external variables and functions within a block apply
363 only to the block containing the declaration. In other words, they
364 have the same scope as any other declaration in the same place.
366 In some other C compilers, a @code{extern} declaration affects all the
367 rest of the file even if it happens within a block.
370 In traditional C, you can combine @code{long}, etc., with a typedef name,
375 typedef long foo bar;
378 In ISO C, this is not allowed: @code{long} and other type modifiers
379 require an explicit @code{int}.
381 @cindex typedef names as function parameters
383 PCC allows typedef names to be used as function parameters.
386 Traditional C allows the following erroneous pair of declarations to
387 appear together in a given scope:
395 GCC treats all characters of identifiers as significant. According to
396 K&R-1 (2.2), ``No more than the first eight characters are significant,
397 although more may be used.''. Also according to K&R-1 (2.2), ``An
398 identifier is a sequence of letters and digits; the first character must
399 be a letter. The underscore _ counts as a letter.'', but GCC also
400 allows dollar signs in identifiers.
404 PCC allows whitespace in the middle of compound assignment operators
405 such as @samp{+=}. GCC, following the ISO standard, does not
411 GCC complains about unterminated character constants inside of
412 preprocessing conditionals that fail. Some programs have English
413 comments enclosed in conditionals that are guaranteed to fail; if these
414 comments contain apostrophes, GCC will probably report an error. For
415 example, this code would produce an error:
419 You can't expect this to work.
423 The best solution to such a problem is to put the text into an actual
424 C comment delimited by @samp{/*@dots{}*/}.
427 Many user programs contain the declaration @samp{long time ();}. In the
428 past, the system header files on many systems did not actually declare
429 @code{time}, so it did not matter what type your program declared it to
430 return. But in systems with ISO C headers, @code{time} is declared to
431 return @code{time_t}, and if that is not the same as @code{long}, then
432 @samp{long time ();} is erroneous.
434 The solution is to change your program to use appropriate system headers
435 (@code{<time.h>} on systems with ISO C headers) and not to declare
436 @code{time} if the system header files declare it, or failing that to
437 use @code{time_t} as the return type of @code{time}.
439 @cindex @code{float} as function value type
441 When compiling functions that return @code{float}, PCC converts it to
442 a double. GCC actually returns a @code{float}. If you are concerned
443 with PCC compatibility, you should declare your functions to return
444 @code{double}; you might as well say what you mean.
449 When compiling functions that return structures or unions, GCC
450 output code normally uses a method different from that used on most
451 versions of Unix. As a result, code compiled with GCC cannot call
452 a structure-returning function compiled with PCC, and vice versa.
454 The method used by GCC is as follows: a structure or union which is
455 1, 2, 4 or 8 bytes long is returned like a scalar. A structure or union
456 with any other size is stored into an address supplied by the caller
457 (usually in a special, fixed register, but on some machines it is passed
458 on the stack). The target hook @code{TARGET_STRUCT_VALUE_RTX}
459 tells GCC where to pass this address.
461 By contrast, PCC on most target machines returns structures and unions
462 of any size by copying the data into an area of static storage, and then
463 returning the address of that storage as if it were a pointer value.
464 The caller must copy the data from that memory area to the place where
465 the value is wanted. GCC does not use this method because it is
466 slower and nonreentrant.
468 On some newer machines, PCC uses a reentrant convention for all
469 structure and union returning. GCC on most of these machines uses a
470 compatible convention when returning structures and unions in memory,
471 but still returns small structures and unions in registers.
473 @opindex fpcc-struct-return
474 You can tell GCC to use a compatible convention for all structure and
475 union returning with the option @option{-fpcc-struct-return}.
477 @cindex preprocessing tokens
478 @cindex preprocessing numbers
480 GCC complains about program fragments such as @samp{0x74ae-0x4000}
481 which appear to be two hexadecimal constants separated by the minus
482 operator. Actually, this string is a single @dfn{preprocessing token}.
483 Each such token must correspond to one token in C@. Since this does not,
484 GCC prints an error message. Although it may appear obvious that what
485 is meant is an operator and two values, the ISO C standard specifically
486 requires that this be treated as erroneous.
488 A @dfn{preprocessing token} is a @dfn{preprocessing number} if it
489 begins with a digit and is followed by letters, underscores, digits,
490 periods and @samp{e+}, @samp{e-}, @samp{E+}, @samp{E-}, @samp{p+},
491 @samp{p-}, @samp{P+}, or @samp{P-} character sequences. (In strict C89
492 mode, the sequences @samp{p+}, @samp{p-}, @samp{P+} and @samp{P-} cannot
493 appear in preprocessing numbers.)
495 To make the above program fragment valid, place whitespace in front of
496 the minus sign. This whitespace will end the preprocessing number.
500 @section Fixed Header Files
502 GCC needs to install corrected versions of some system header files.
503 This is because most target systems have some header files that won't
504 work with GCC unless they are changed. Some have bugs, some are
505 incompatible with ISO C, and some depend on special features of other
508 Installing GCC automatically creates and installs the fixed header
509 files, by running a program called @code{fixincludes}. Normally, you
510 don't need to pay attention to this. But there are cases where it
511 doesn't do the right thing automatically.
515 If you update the system's header files, such as by installing a new
516 system version, the fixed header files of GCC are not automatically
517 updated. They can be updated using the @command{mkheaders} script
519 @file{@var{libexecdir}/gcc/@var{target}/@var{version}/install-tools/}.
522 On some systems, header file directories contain
523 machine-specific symbolic links in certain places. This makes it
524 possible to share most of the header files among hosts running the
525 same version of the system on different machine models.
527 The programs that fix the header files do not understand this special
528 way of using symbolic links; therefore, the directory of fixed header
529 files is good only for the machine model used to build it.
531 It is possible to make separate sets of fixed header files for the
532 different machine models, and arrange a structure of symbolic links so
533 as to use the proper set, but you'll have to do this by hand.
536 @node Standard Libraries
537 @section Standard Libraries
540 GCC by itself attempts to be a conforming freestanding implementation.
541 @xref{Standards,,Language Standards Supported by GCC}, for details of
542 what this means. Beyond the library facilities required of such an
543 implementation, the rest of the C library is supplied by the vendor of
544 the operating system. If that C library doesn't conform to the C
545 standards, then your programs might get warnings (especially when using
546 @option{-Wall}) that you don't expect.
548 For example, the @code{sprintf} function on SunOS 4.1.3 returns
549 @code{char *} while the C standard says that @code{sprintf} returns an
550 @code{int}. The @code{fixincludes} program could make the prototype for
551 this function match the Standard, but that would be wrong, since the
552 function will still return @code{char *}.
554 If you need a Standard compliant library, then you need to find one, as
555 GCC does not provide one. The GNU C library (called @code{glibc})
556 provides ISO C, POSIX, BSD, SystemV and X/Open compatibility for
557 GNU/Linux and HURD-based GNU systems; no recent version of it supports
558 other systems, though some very old versions did. Version 2.2 of the
559 GNU C library includes nearly complete C99 support. You could also ask
560 your operating system vendor if newer libraries are available.
562 @node Disappointments
563 @section Disappointments and Misunderstandings
565 These problems are perhaps regrettable, but we don't know any practical
570 Certain local variables aren't recognized by debuggers when you compile
573 This occurs because sometimes GCC optimizes the variable out of
574 existence. There is no way to tell the debugger how to compute the
575 value such a variable ``would have had'', and it is not clear that would
576 be desirable anyway. So GCC simply does not mention the eliminated
577 variable when it writes debugging information.
579 You have to expect a certain amount of disagreement between the
580 executable and your source code, when you use optimization.
582 @cindex conflicting types
583 @cindex scope of declaration
585 Users often think it is a bug when GCC reports an error for code
589 int foo (struct mumble *);
591 struct mumble @{ @dots{} @};
593 int foo (struct mumble *x)
597 This code really is erroneous, because the scope of @code{struct
598 mumble} in the prototype is limited to the argument list containing it.
599 It does not refer to the @code{struct mumble} defined with file scope
600 immediately below---they are two unrelated types with similar names in
603 But in the definition of @code{foo}, the file-scope type is used
604 because that is available to be inherited. Thus, the definition and
605 the prototype do not match, and you get an error.
607 This behavior may seem silly, but it's what the ISO standard specifies.
608 It is easy enough for you to make your code work by moving the
609 definition of @code{struct mumble} above the prototype. It's not worth
610 being incompatible with ISO C just to avoid an error for the example
614 Accesses to bit-fields even in volatile objects works by accessing larger
615 objects, such as a byte or a word. You cannot rely on what size of
616 object is accessed in order to read or write the bit-field; it may even
617 vary for a given bit-field according to the precise usage.
619 If you care about controlling the amount of memory that is accessed, use
620 volatile but do not use bit-fields.
623 GCC comes with shell scripts to fix certain known problems in system
624 header files. They install corrected copies of various header files in
625 a special directory where only GCC will normally look for them. The
626 scripts adapt to various systems by searching all the system header
627 files for the problem cases that we know about.
629 If new system header files are installed, nothing automatically arranges
630 to update the corrected header files. They can be updated using the
631 @command{mkheaders} script installed in
632 @file{@var{libexecdir}/gcc/@var{target}/@var{version}/install-tools/}.
635 @cindex floating point precision
636 On 68000 and x86 systems, for instance, you can get paradoxical results
637 if you test the precise values of floating point numbers. For example,
638 you can find that a floating point value which is not a NaN is not equal
639 to itself. This results from the fact that the floating point registers
640 hold a few more bits of precision than fit in a @code{double} in memory.
641 Compiled code moves values between memory and floating point registers
642 at its convenience, and moving them into memory truncates them.
644 @opindex ffloat-store
645 You can partially avoid this problem by using the @option{-ffloat-store}
646 option (@pxref{Optimize Options}).
649 On AIX and other platforms without weak symbol support, templates
650 need to be instantiated explicitly and symbols for static members
651 of templates will not be generated.
654 On AIX, GCC scans object files and library archives for static
655 constructors and destructors when linking an application before the
656 linker prunes unreferenced symbols. This is necessary to prevent the
657 AIX linker from mistakenly assuming that static constructor or
658 destructor are unused and removing them before the scanning can occur.
659 All static constructors and destructors found will be referenced even
660 though the modules in which they occur may not be used by the program.
661 This may lead to both increased executable size and unexpected symbol
665 @node C++ Misunderstandings
666 @section Common Misunderstandings with GNU C++
668 @cindex misunderstandings in C++
669 @cindex surprises in C++
670 @cindex C++ misunderstandings
671 C++ is a complex language and an evolving one, and its standard
672 definition (the ISO C++ standard) was only recently completed. As a
673 result, your C++ compiler may occasionally surprise you, even when its
674 behavior is correct. This section discusses some areas that frequently
675 give rise to questions of this sort.
678 * Static Definitions:: Static member declarations are not definitions
679 * Name lookup:: Name lookup, templates, and accessing members of base classes
680 * Temporaries:: Temporaries may vanish before you expect
681 * Copy Assignment:: Copy Assignment operators copy virtual bases twice
684 @node Static Definitions
685 @subsection Declare @emph{and} Define Static Members
687 @cindex C++ static data, declaring and defining
688 @cindex static data in C++, declaring and defining
689 @cindex declaring static data in C++
690 @cindex defining static data in C++
691 When a class has static data members, it is not enough to @emph{declare}
692 the static member; you must also @emph{define} it. For example:
703 This declaration only establishes that the class @code{Foo} has an
704 @code{int} named @code{Foo::bar}, and a member function named
705 @code{Foo::method}. But you still need to define @emph{both}
706 @code{method} and @code{bar} elsewhere. According to the ISO
707 standard, you must supply an initializer in one (and only one) source
714 Other C++ compilers may not correctly implement the standard behavior.
715 As a result, when you switch to @command{g++} from one of these compilers,
716 you may discover that a program that appeared to work correctly in fact
717 does not conform to the standard: @command{g++} reports as undefined
718 symbols any static data members that lack definitions.
722 @subsection Name lookup, templates, and accessing members of base classes
724 @cindex base class members
725 @cindex two-stage name lookup
726 @cindex dependent name lookup
728 The C++ standard prescribes that all names that are not dependent on
729 template parameters are bound to their present definitions when parsing
730 a template function or class.@footnote{The C++ standard just uses the
731 term ``dependent'' for names that depend on the type or value of
732 template parameters. This shorter term will also be used in the rest of
733 this section.} Only names that are dependent are looked up at the point
734 of instantiation. For example, consider
740 template <typename T>
753 Here, the names @code{foo} and @code{N} appear in a context that does
754 not depend on the type of @code{T}. The compiler will thus require that
755 they are defined in the context of use in the template, not only before
756 the point of instantiation, and will here use @code{::foo(double)} and
757 @code{A::N}, respectively. In particular, it will convert the integer
758 value to a @code{double} when passing it to @code{::foo(double)}.
760 Conversely, @code{bar} and the call to @code{foo} in the fourth marked
761 line are used in contexts that do depend on the type of @code{T}, so
762 they are only looked up at the point of instantiation, and you can
763 provide declarations for them after declaring the template, but before
764 instantiating it. In particular, if you instantiate @code{A::f<int>},
765 the last line will call an overloaded @code{::foo(int)} if one was
766 provided, even if after the declaration of @code{struct A}.
768 This distinction between lookup of dependent and non-dependent names is
769 called two-stage (or dependent) name lookup. G++ implements it
772 Two-stage name lookup sometimes leads to situations with behavior
773 different from non-template codes. The most common is probably this:
776 template <typename T> struct Base @{
780 template <typename T> struct Derived : public Base<T> @{
781 int get_i() @{ return i; @}
785 In @code{get_i()}, @code{i} is not used in a dependent context, so the
786 compiler will look for a name declared at the enclosing namespace scope
787 (which is the global scope here). It will not look into the base class,
788 since that is dependent and you may declare specializations of
789 @code{Base} even after declaring @code{Derived}, so the compiler can't
790 really know what @code{i} would refer to. If there is no global
791 variable @code{i}, then you will get an error message.
793 In order to make it clear that you want the member of the base class,
794 you need to defer lookup until instantiation time, at which the base
795 class is known. For this, you need to access @code{i} in a dependent
796 context, by either using @code{this->i} (remember that @code{this} is of
797 type @code{Derived<T>*}, so is obviously dependent), or using
798 @code{Base<T>::i}. Alternatively, @code{Base<T>::i} might be brought
799 into scope by a @code{using}-declaration.
801 Another, similar example involves calling member functions of a base
805 template <typename T> struct Base @{
809 template <typename T> struct Derived : Base<T> @{
810 int g() @{ return f(); @};
814 Again, the call to @code{f()} is not dependent on template arguments
815 (there are no arguments that depend on the type @code{T}, and it is also
816 not otherwise specified that the call should be in a dependent context).
817 Thus a global declaration of such a function must be available, since
818 the one in the base class is not visible until instantiation time. The
819 compiler will consequently produce the following error message:
822 x.cc: In member function `int Derived<T>::g()':
823 x.cc:6: error: there are no arguments to `f' that depend on a template
824 parameter, so a declaration of `f' must be available
825 x.cc:6: error: (if you use `-fpermissive', G++ will accept your code, but
826 allowing the use of an undeclared name is deprecated)
829 To make the code valid either use @code{this->f()}, or
830 @code{Base<T>::f()}. Using the @option{-fpermissive} flag will also let
831 the compiler accept the code, by marking all function calls for which no
832 declaration is visible at the time of definition of the template for
833 later lookup at instantiation time, as if it were a dependent call.
834 We do not recommend using @option{-fpermissive} to work around invalid
835 code, and it will also only catch cases where functions in base classes
836 are called, not where variables in base classes are used (as in the
839 Note that some compilers (including G++ versions prior to 3.4) get these
840 examples wrong and accept above code without an error. Those compilers
841 do not implement two-stage name lookup correctly.
845 @subsection Temporaries May Vanish Before You Expect
847 @cindex temporaries, lifetime of
848 @cindex portions of temporary objects, pointers to
849 It is dangerous to use pointers or references to @emph{portions} of a
850 temporary object. The compiler may very well delete the object before
851 you expect it to, leaving a pointer to garbage. The most common place
852 where this problem crops up is in classes like string classes,
853 especially ones that define a conversion function to type @code{char *}
854 or @code{const char *}---which is one reason why the standard
855 @code{string} class requires you to call the @code{c_str} member
856 function. However, any class that returns a pointer to some internal
857 structure is potentially subject to this problem.
859 For example, a program may use a function @code{strfunc} that returns
860 @code{string} objects, and another function @code{charfunc} that
861 operates on pointers to @code{char}:
865 void charfunc (const char *);
870 const char *p = strfunc().c_str();
879 In this situation, it may seem reasonable to save a pointer to the C
880 string returned by the @code{c_str} member function and use that rather
881 than call @code{c_str} repeatedly. However, the temporary string
882 created by the call to @code{strfunc} is destroyed after @code{p} is
883 initialized, at which point @code{p} is left pointing to freed memory.
885 Code like this may run successfully under some other compilers,
886 particularly obsolete cfront-based compilers that delete temporaries
887 along with normal local variables. However, the GNU C++ behavior is
888 standard-conforming, so if your program depends on late destruction of
889 temporaries it is not portable.
891 The safe way to write such code is to give the temporary a name, which
892 forces it to remain until the end of the scope of the name. For
896 const string& tmp = strfunc ();
897 charfunc (tmp.c_str ());
900 @node Copy Assignment
901 @subsection Implicit Copy-Assignment for Virtual Bases
903 When a base class is virtual, only one subobject of the base class
904 belongs to each full object. Also, the constructors and destructors are
905 invoked only once, and called from the most-derived class. However, such
906 objects behave unspecified when being assigned. For example:
911 Base(char *n) : name(strdup(n))@{@}
912 Base& operator= (const Base& other)@{
914 name = strdup (other.name);
918 struct A:virtual Base@{
923 struct B:virtual Base@{
928 struct Derived:public A, public B@{
929 Derived():Base("Derived")@{@}
932 void func(Derived &d1, Derived &d2)
938 The C++ standard specifies that @samp{Base::Base} is only called once
939 when constructing or copy-constructing a Derived object. It is
940 unspecified whether @samp{Base::operator=} is called more than once when
941 the implicit copy-assignment for Derived objects is invoked (as it is
942 inside @samp{func} in the example).
944 G++ implements the ``intuitive'' algorithm for copy-assignment: assign all
945 direct bases, then assign all members. In that algorithm, the virtual
946 base subobject can be encountered more than once. In the example, copying
947 proceeds in the following order: @samp{val}, @samp{name} (via
948 @code{strdup}), @samp{bval}, and @samp{name} again.
950 If application code relies on copy-assignment, a user-defined
951 copy-assignment operator removes any uncertainties. With such an
952 operator, the application can define whether and how the virtual base
953 subobject is assigned.
955 @node Protoize Caveats
956 @section Caveats of using @command{protoize}
958 The conversion programs @command{protoize} and @command{unprotoize} can
959 sometimes change a source file in a way that won't work unless you
964 @command{protoize} can insert references to a type name or type tag before
965 the definition, or in a file where they are not defined.
967 If this happens, compiler error messages should show you where the new
968 references are, so fixing the file by hand is straightforward.
971 There are some C constructs which @command{protoize} cannot figure out.
972 For example, it can't determine argument types for declaring a
973 pointer-to-function variable; this you must do by hand. @command{protoize}
974 inserts a comment containing @samp{???} each time it finds such a
975 variable; so you can find all such variables by searching for this
976 string. ISO C does not require declaring the argument types of
977 pointer-to-function types.
980 Using @command{unprotoize} can easily introduce bugs. If the program
981 relied on prototypes to bring about conversion of arguments, these
982 conversions will not take place in the program without prototypes.
983 One case in which you can be sure @command{unprotoize} is safe is when
984 you are removing prototypes that were made with @command{protoize}; if
985 the program worked before without any prototypes, it will work again
989 You can find all the places where this problem might occur by compiling
990 the program with the @option{-Wconversion} option. It prints a warning
991 whenever an argument is converted.
994 Both conversion programs can be confused if there are macro calls in and
995 around the text to be converted. In other words, the standard syntax
996 for a declaration or definition must not result from expanding a macro.
997 This problem is inherent in the design of C and cannot be fixed. If
998 only a few functions have confusing macro calls, you can easily convert
1002 @command{protoize} cannot get the argument types for a function whose
1003 definition was not actually compiled due to preprocessing conditionals.
1004 When this happens, @command{protoize} changes nothing in regard to such
1005 a function. @command{protoize} tries to detect such instances and warn
1008 You can generally work around this problem by using @command{protoize} step
1009 by step, each time specifying a different set of @option{-D} options for
1010 compilation, until all of the functions have been converted. There is
1011 no automatic way to verify that you have got them all, however.
1014 Confusion may result if there is an occasion to convert a function
1015 declaration or definition in a region of source code where there is more
1016 than one formal parameter list present. Thus, attempts to convert code
1017 containing multiple (conditionally compiled) versions of a single
1018 function header (in the same vicinity) may not produce the desired (or
1021 If you plan on converting source files which contain such code, it is
1022 recommended that you first make sure that each conditionally compiled
1023 region of source code which contains an alternative function header also
1024 contains at least one additional follower token (past the final right
1025 parenthesis of the function header). This should circumvent the
1029 @command{unprotoize} can become confused when trying to convert a function
1030 definition or declaration which contains a declaration for a
1031 pointer-to-function formal argument which has the same name as the
1032 function being defined or declared. We recommend you avoid such choices
1033 of formal parameter names.
1036 You might also want to correct some of the indentation by hand and break
1037 long lines. (The conversion programs don't write lines longer than
1038 eighty characters in any case.)
1042 @section Certain Changes We Don't Want to Make
1044 This section lists changes that people frequently request, but which
1045 we do not make because we think GCC is better without them.
1049 Checking the number and type of arguments to a function which has an
1050 old-fashioned definition and no prototype.
1052 Such a feature would work only occasionally---only for calls that appear
1053 in the same file as the called function, following the definition. The
1054 only way to check all calls reliably is to add a prototype for the
1055 function. But adding a prototype eliminates the motivation for this
1056 feature. So the feature is not worthwhile.
1059 Warning about using an expression whose type is signed as a shift count.
1061 Shift count operands are probably signed more often than unsigned.
1062 Warning about this would cause far more annoyance than good.
1065 Warning about assigning a signed value to an unsigned variable.
1067 Such assignments must be very common; warning about them would cause
1068 more annoyance than good.
1071 Warning when a non-void function value is ignored.
1073 C contains many standard functions that return a value that most
1074 programs choose to ignore. One obvious example is @code{printf}.
1075 Warning about this practice only leads the defensive programmer to
1076 clutter programs with dozens of casts to @code{void}. Such casts are
1077 required so frequently that they become visual noise. Writing those
1078 casts becomes so automatic that they no longer convey useful
1079 information about the intentions of the programmer. For functions
1080 where the return value should never be ignored, use the
1081 @code{warn_unused_result} function attribute (@pxref{Function
1085 @opindex fshort-enums
1086 Making @option{-fshort-enums} the default.
1088 This would cause storage layout to be incompatible with most other C
1089 compilers. And it doesn't seem very important, given that you can get
1090 the same result in other ways. The case where it matters most is when
1091 the enumeration-valued object is inside a structure, and in that case
1092 you can specify a field width explicitly.
1095 Making bit-fields unsigned by default on particular machines where ``the
1096 ABI standard'' says to do so.
1098 The ISO C standard leaves it up to the implementation whether a bit-field
1099 declared plain @code{int} is signed or not. This in effect creates two
1100 alternative dialects of C@.
1102 @opindex fsigned-bitfields
1103 @opindex funsigned-bitfields
1104 The GNU C compiler supports both dialects; you can specify the signed
1105 dialect with @option{-fsigned-bitfields} and the unsigned dialect with
1106 @option{-funsigned-bitfields}. However, this leaves open the question of
1107 which dialect to use by default.
1109 Currently, the preferred dialect makes plain bit-fields signed, because
1110 this is simplest. Since @code{int} is the same as @code{signed int} in
1111 every other context, it is cleanest for them to be the same in bit-fields
1114 Some computer manufacturers have published Application Binary Interface
1115 standards which specify that plain bit-fields should be unsigned. It is
1116 a mistake, however, to say anything about this issue in an ABI@. This is
1117 because the handling of plain bit-fields distinguishes two dialects of C@.
1118 Both dialects are meaningful on every type of machine. Whether a
1119 particular object file was compiled using signed bit-fields or unsigned
1120 is of no concern to other object files, even if they access the same
1121 bit-fields in the same data structures.
1123 A given program is written in one or the other of these two dialects.
1124 The program stands a chance to work on most any machine if it is
1125 compiled with the proper dialect. It is unlikely to work at all if
1126 compiled with the wrong dialect.
1128 Many users appreciate the GNU C compiler because it provides an
1129 environment that is uniform across machines. These users would be
1130 inconvenienced if the compiler treated plain bit-fields differently on
1133 Occasionally users write programs intended only for a particular machine
1134 type. On these occasions, the users would benefit if the GNU C compiler
1135 were to support by default the same dialect as the other compilers on
1136 that machine. But such applications are rare. And users writing a
1137 program to run on more than one type of machine cannot possibly benefit
1138 from this kind of compatibility.
1140 This is why GCC does and will treat plain bit-fields in the same
1141 fashion on all types of machines (by default).
1143 There are some arguments for making bit-fields unsigned by default on all
1144 machines. If, for example, this becomes a universal de facto standard,
1145 it would make sense for GCC to go along with it. This is something
1146 to be considered in the future.
1148 (Of course, users strongly concerned about portability should indicate
1149 explicitly in each bit-field whether it is signed or not. In this way,
1150 they write programs which have the same meaning in both C dialects.)
1155 Undefining @code{__STDC__} when @option{-ansi} is not used.
1157 Currently, GCC defines @code{__STDC__} unconditionally. This provides
1158 good results in practice.
1160 Programmers normally use conditionals on @code{__STDC__} to ask whether
1161 it is safe to use certain features of ISO C, such as function
1162 prototypes or ISO token concatenation. Since plain @command{gcc} supports
1163 all the features of ISO C, the correct answer to these questions is
1166 Some users try to use @code{__STDC__} to check for the availability of
1167 certain library facilities. This is actually incorrect usage in an ISO
1168 C program, because the ISO C standard says that a conforming
1169 freestanding implementation should define @code{__STDC__} even though it
1170 does not have the library facilities. @samp{gcc -ansi -pedantic} is a
1171 conforming freestanding implementation, and it is therefore required to
1172 define @code{__STDC__}, even though it does not come with an ISO C
1175 Sometimes people say that defining @code{__STDC__} in a compiler that
1176 does not completely conform to the ISO C standard somehow violates the
1177 standard. This is illogical. The standard is a standard for compilers
1178 that claim to support ISO C, such as @samp{gcc -ansi}---not for other
1179 compilers such as plain @command{gcc}. Whatever the ISO C standard says
1180 is relevant to the design of plain @command{gcc} without @option{-ansi} only
1181 for pragmatic reasons, not as a requirement.
1183 GCC normally defines @code{__STDC__} to be 1, and in addition
1184 defines @code{__STRICT_ANSI__} if you specify the @option{-ansi} option,
1185 or a @option{-std} option for strict conformance to some version of ISO C@.
1186 On some hosts, system include files use a different convention, where
1187 @code{__STDC__} is normally 0, but is 1 if the user specifies strict
1188 conformance to the C Standard. GCC follows the host convention when
1189 processing system include files, but when processing user files it follows
1190 the usual GNU C convention.
1193 Undefining @code{__STDC__} in C++.
1195 Programs written to compile with C++-to-C translators get the
1196 value of @code{__STDC__} that goes with the C compiler that is
1197 subsequently used. These programs must test @code{__STDC__}
1198 to determine what kind of C preprocessor that compiler uses:
1199 whether they should concatenate tokens in the ISO C fashion
1200 or in the traditional fashion.
1202 These programs work properly with GNU C++ if @code{__STDC__} is defined.
1203 They would not work otherwise.
1205 In addition, many header files are written to provide prototypes in ISO
1206 C but not in traditional C@. Many of these header files can work without
1207 change in C++ provided @code{__STDC__} is defined. If @code{__STDC__}
1208 is not defined, they will all fail, and will all need to be changed to
1209 test explicitly for C++ as well.
1212 Deleting ``empty'' loops.
1214 Historically, GCC has not deleted ``empty'' loops under the
1215 assumption that the most likely reason you would put one in a program is
1216 to have a delay, so deleting them will not make real programs run any
1219 However, the rationale here is that optimization of a nonempty loop
1220 cannot produce an empty one. This held for carefully written C compiled
1221 with less powerful optimizers but is not always the case for carefully
1222 written C++ or with more powerful optimizers.
1224 @opindex funroll-loops
1225 Thus GCC will remove operations from loops whenever it can determine
1226 those operations are not externally visible (apart from the time taken
1227 to execute them, of course). As GCC improves, it will remove the loop
1228 itself. Indeed, with @option{-funroll-loops} small loops can already be
1229 removed, so leaving an empty non-unrolled loop is both sub-optimal and
1232 Be aware of this when performing timing tests, for instance the
1233 following loop can be completely removed, provided
1234 @code{some_expression} can provably not change any global state.
1241 for (ix = 0; ix != 10000; ix++)
1242 sum += some_expression;
1246 Even though @code{sum} is accumulated in the loop, no use is made of
1247 that summation, so the accumulation can be removed.
1250 Making side effects happen in the same order as in some other compiler.
1252 @cindex side effects, order of evaluation
1253 @cindex order of evaluation, side effects
1254 It is never safe to depend on the order of evaluation of side effects.
1255 For example, a function call like this may very well behave differently
1256 from one compiler to another:
1259 void func (int, int);
1265 There is no guarantee (in either the C or the C++ standard language
1266 definitions) that the increments will be evaluated in any particular
1267 order. Either increment might happen first. @code{func} might get the
1268 arguments @samp{2, 3}, or it might get @samp{3, 2}, or even @samp{2, 2}.
1271 Making certain warnings into errors by default.
1273 Some ISO C testsuites report failure when the compiler does not produce
1274 an error message for a certain program.
1276 @opindex pedantic-errors
1277 ISO C requires a ``diagnostic'' message for certain kinds of invalid
1278 programs, but a warning is defined by GCC to count as a diagnostic. If
1279 GCC produces a warning but not an error, that is correct ISO C support.
1280 If testsuites call this ``failure'', they should be run with the GCC
1281 option @option{-pedantic-errors}, which will turn these warnings into
1286 @node Warnings and Errors
1287 @section Warning Messages and Error Messages
1289 @cindex error messages
1290 @cindex warnings vs errors
1291 @cindex messages, warning and error
1292 The GNU compiler can produce two kinds of diagnostics: errors and
1293 warnings. Each kind has a different purpose:
1297 @dfn{Errors} report problems that make it impossible to compile your
1298 program. GCC reports errors with the source file name and line
1299 number where the problem is apparent.
1302 @dfn{Warnings} report other unusual conditions in your code that
1303 @emph{may} indicate a problem, although compilation can (and does)
1304 proceed. Warning messages also report the source file name and line
1305 number, but include the text @samp{warning:} to distinguish them
1306 from error messages.
1309 Warnings may indicate danger points where you should check to make sure
1310 that your program really does what you intend; or the use of obsolete
1311 features; or the use of nonstandard features of GNU C or C++. Many
1312 warnings are issued only if you ask for them, with one of the @option{-W}
1313 options (for instance, @option{-Wall} requests a variety of useful
1317 @opindex pedantic-errors
1318 GCC always tries to compile your program if possible; it never
1319 gratuitously rejects a program whose meaning is clear merely because
1320 (for instance) it fails to conform to a standard. In some cases,
1321 however, the C and C++ standards specify that certain extensions are
1322 forbidden, and a diagnostic @emph{must} be issued by a conforming
1323 compiler. The @option{-pedantic} option tells GCC to issue warnings in
1324 such cases; @option{-pedantic-errors} says to make them errors instead.
1325 This does not mean that @emph{all} non-ISO constructs get warnings
1328 @xref{Warning Options,,Options to Request or Suppress Warnings}, for
1329 more detail on these and related command-line options.