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.
5
6@node Trouble
7@chapter Known Causes of Trouble with GCC
8@cindex bugs, known
9@cindex installation trouble
10@cindex known causes of trouble
11
12This section describes known problems that affect users of GCC@.  Most
13of these are not GCC bugs per se---if they were, we would fix them.
14But the result for a user may be like the result of a bug.
15
16Some of these problems are due to bugs in other software, some are
17missing features that are too much work to add, and some are places
18where people's opinions differ as to what is best.
19
20@menu
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,
35                         and which get errors.
36@end menu
37
38@node Actual Bugs
39@section Actual Bugs We Haven't Fixed Yet
40
41@itemize @bullet
42@item
43The @code{fixincludes} script interacts badly with automounters; if the
44directory of system header files is automounted, it tends to be
45unmounted while @code{fixincludes} is running.  This would seem to be a
46bug in the automounter.  We don't know any good way to work around it.
47
48@item
49The @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,
52edit the offending file and place the typedef in front of the
53prototypes.
54@end itemize
55
56@node Cross-Compiler Problems
57@section Cross-Compiler Problems
58
59You may run into problems with cross compilation on certain machines,
60for several reasons.
61
62@itemize @bullet
63@item
64At present, the program @file{mips-tfile} which adds debug
65support to object files on MIPS systems does not work in a cross
66compile environment.
67@end itemize
68
69@node Interoperation
70@section Interoperation
71
72This section lists various difficulties encountered in using GCC
73together with other compilers or with the assemblers, linkers,
74libraries and debuggers on certain systems.
75
76@itemize @bullet
77@item
78On many platforms, GCC supports a different ABI for C++ than do other
79compilers, so the object files compiled by GCC cannot be used with object
80files generated by another C++ compiler.
81
82An area where the difference is most apparent is name mangling.  The use
83of different name mangling is intentional, to protect you from more subtle
84problems.
85Compilers differ as to many internal details of C++ implementation,
86including: how class instances are laid out, how multiple inheritance is
87implemented, and how virtual function calls are handled.  If the name
88encoding were made the same, your programs would link against libraries
89provided from other compilers---but the programs would then crash when
90run.  Incompatible libraries are then detected at link time, rather than
91at run time.
92
93@item
94On some BSD systems, including some versions of Ultrix, use of profiling
95causes static variable destructors (currently used only in C++) not to
96be run.
97
98@item
99On some SGI systems, when you use @option{-lgl_s} as an option,
100it gets translated magically to @samp{-lgl_s -lX11_s -lc_s}.
101Naturally, this does not happen when you use GCC@.
102You must specify all three options explicitly.
103
104@item
105On a SPARC, GCC aligns all values of type @code{double} on an 8-byte
106boundary, and it expects every @code{double} to be so aligned.  The Sun
107compiler usually gives @code{double} values 8-byte alignment, with one
108exception: function arguments of type @code{double} may not be aligned.
109
110As a result, if a function compiled with Sun CC takes the address of an
111argument of type @code{double} and passes this pointer of type
112@code{double *} to a function compiled with GCC, dereferencing the
113pointer may cause a fatal signal.
114
115One way to solve this problem is to compile your entire program with GCC@.
116Another solution is to modify the function that is compiled with
117Sun CC to copy the argument into a local variable; local variables
118are always properly aligned.  A third solution is to modify the function
119that uses the pointer to dereference it via the following function
120@code{access_double} instead of directly with @samp{*}:
121
122@smallexample
123inline double
124access_double (double *unaligned_ptr)
125@{
126  union d2i @{ double d; int i[2]; @};
127
128  union d2i *p = (union d2i *) unaligned_ptr;
129  union d2i u;
130
131  u.i[0] = p->i[0];
132  u.i[1] = p->i[1];
133
134  return u.d;
135@}
136@end smallexample
137
138@noindent
139Storing into the pointer can be done likewise with the same union.
140
141@item
142On Solaris, the @code{malloc} function in the @file{libmalloc.a} library
143may allocate memory that is only 4 byte aligned.  Since GCC on the
144SPARC assumes that doubles are 8 byte aligned, this may result in a
145fatal signal if doubles are stored in memory allocated by the
146@file{libmalloc.a} library.
147
148The 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
150this problem.
151
152@item
153On the HP PA machine, ADB sometimes fails to work on functions compiled
154with GCC@.  Specifically, it fails to work on functions that use
155@code{alloca} or variable-size arrays.  This is because GCC doesn't
156generate HP-UX unwind descriptors for such functions.  It may even be
157impossible to generate them.
158
159@item
160Debugging (@option{-g}) is not supported on the HP PA machine, unless you use
161the preliminary GNU tools.
162
163@item
164Taking the address of a label may generate errors from the HP-UX
165PA assembler.  GAS for the PA does not have this problem.
166
167@item
168Using floating point parameters for indirect calls to static functions
169will not work when using the HP assembler.  There simply is no way for GCC
170to specify what registers hold arguments for static functions when using
171the HP assembler.  GAS for the PA does not have this problem.
172
173@item
174In extremely rare cases involving some very large functions you may
175receive errors from the HP linker complaining about an out of bounds
176unconditional branch offset.  This used to occur more often in previous
177versions of GCC, but is now exceptionally rare.  If you should run
178into it, you can work around by making your function smaller.
179
180@item
181GCC compiled code sometimes emits warnings from the HP-UX assembler of
182the form:
183
184@smallexample
185(warning) Use of GR3 when
186  frame >= 8192 may cause conflict.
187@end smallexample
188
189These warnings are harmless and can be safely ignored.
190
191@item
192In extremely rare cases involving some very large functions you may
193receive errors from the AIX Assembler complaining about a displacement
194that is too large.  If you should run into it, you can work around by
195making your function smaller.
196
197@item
198The @file{libstdc++.a} library in GCC relies on the SVR4 dynamic
199linker semantics which merges global symbols between libraries and
200applications, especially necessary for C++ streams functionality.
201This is not the default behavior of AIX shared libraries and dynamic
202linking.  @file{libstdc++.a} is built on AIX with ``runtime-linking''
203enabled so that symbol merging can occur.  To utilize this feature,
204the application linked with @file{libstdc++.a} must include the
205@option{-Wl,-brtl} flag on the link line.  G++ cannot impose this
206because this option may interfere with the semantics of the user
207program and users may not always use @samp{g++} to link his or her
208application.  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
211merging semantics will continue to function correctly.
212
213@item
214An application can interpose its own definition of functions for
215functions invoked by @file{libstdc++.a} with ``runtime-linking''
216enabled on AIX@.  To accomplish this the application must be linked
217with ``runtime-linking'' option and the functions explicitly must be
218exported by the application (@option{-Wl,-brtl,-bE:exportfile}).
219
220@item
221AIX on the RS/6000 provides support (NLS) for environments outside of
222the United States.  Compilers and assemblers use NLS to support
223locale-specific representations of various objects including
224floating-point numbers (@samp{.} vs @samp{,} for separating decimal
225fractions).  There have been problems reported where the library linked
226with GCC does not produce the same floating-point formats that the
227assembler accepts.  If you have this problem, set the @env{LANG}
228environment variable to @samp{C} or @samp{En_US}.
229
230@item
231@opindex fdollars-in-identifiers
232Even if you specify @option{-fdollars-in-identifiers},
233you cannot successfully use @samp{$} in identifiers on the RS/6000 due
234to a restriction in the IBM assembler.  GAS supports these
235identifiers.
236
237@cindex VAX calling convention
238@cindex Ultrix calling convention
239@item
240@opindex fcall-saved
241On Ultrix, the Fortran compiler expects registers 2 through 5 to be saved
242by function calls.  However, the C compiler uses conventions compatible
243with BSD Unix: registers 2 through 5 may be clobbered by function calls.
244
245GCC uses the same convention as the Ultrix C compiler.  You can use
246these options to produce code compatible with the Fortran compiler:
247
248@smallexample
249-fcall-saved-r2 -fcall-saved-r3 -fcall-saved-r4 -fcall-saved-r5
250@end smallexample
251@end itemize
252
253@node Incompatibilities
254@section Incompatibilities of GCC
255@cindex incompatibilities of GCC
256@opindex traditional
257
258There are several noteworthy incompatibilities between GNU C and K&R
259(non-ISO) versions of C@.
260
261@itemize @bullet
262@cindex string constants
263@cindex read-only strings
264@cindex shared strings
265@item
266GCC normally makes string constants read-only.  If several
267identical-looking string constants are used, GCC stores only one
268copy of the string.
269
270@cindex @code{mktemp}, and constant strings
271One consequence is that you cannot call @code{mktemp} with a string
272constant argument.  The function @code{mktemp} always alters the
273string its argument points to.
274
275@cindex @code{sscanf}, and constant strings
276@cindex @code{fscanf}, and constant strings
277@cindex @code{scanf}, and constant strings
278Another consequence is that @code{sscanf} does not work on some very
279old systems when passed a string constant as its format control string
280or input.  This is because @code{sscanf} incorrectly tries to write
281into the string constant.  Likewise @code{fscanf} and @code{scanf}.
282
283The solution to these problems is to change the program to use
284@code{char}-array variables with initialization strings for these
285purposes instead of string constants.
286
287@item
288@code{-2147483648} is positive.
289
290This 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}.
292Negating this value yields 2147483648 again.
293
294@item
295GCC does not substitute macro arguments when they appear inside of
296string constants.  For example, the following macro in GCC
297
298@smallexample
299#define foo(a) "a"
300@end smallexample
301
302@noindent
303will produce output @code{"a"} regardless of what the argument @var{a} is.
304
305@cindex @code{setjmp} incompatibilities
306@cindex @code{longjmp} incompatibilities
307@item
308When you use @code{setjmp} and @code{longjmp}, the only automatic
309variables guaranteed to remain valid are those declared
310@code{volatile}.  This is a consequence of automatic register
311allocation.  Consider this function:
312
313@smallexample
314jmp_buf j;
315
316foo ()
317@{
318  int a, b;
319
320  a = fun1 ();
321  if (setjmp (j))
322    return a;
323
324  a = fun2 ();
325  /* @r{@code{longjmp (j)} may occur in @code{fun3}.} */
326  return a + fun3 ();
327@}
328@end smallexample
329
330Here @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
332its first value is restored; otherwise, it keeps the last value stored
333in it.
334
335@opindex W
336If you use the @option{-W} option with the @option{-O} option, you will
337get a warning when GCC thinks such a problem might be possible.
338
339@item
340Programs that use preprocessing directives in the middle of macro
341arguments do not work with GCC@.  For example, a program like this
342will not work:
343
344@smallexample
345@group
346foobar (
347#define luser
348        hack)
349@end group
350@end smallexample
351
352ISO C does not permit such a construct.
353
354@item
355K&R compilers allow comments to cross over an inclusion boundary
356(i.e.@: started in an include file and ended in the including file).
357
358@cindex external declaration scope
359@cindex scope of external declarations
360@cindex declaration scope
361@item
362Declarations of external variables and functions within a block apply
363only to the block containing the declaration.  In other words, they
364have the same scope as any other declaration in the same place.
365
366In some other C compilers, a @code{extern} declaration affects all the
367rest of the file even if it happens within a block.
368
369@item
370In traditional C, you can combine @code{long}, etc., with a typedef name,
371as shown here:
372
373@smallexample
374typedef int foo;
375typedef long foo bar;
376@end smallexample
377
378In ISO C, this is not allowed: @code{long} and other type modifiers
379require an explicit @code{int}.
380
381@cindex typedef names as function parameters
382@item
383PCC allows typedef names to be used as function parameters.
384
385@item
386Traditional C allows the following erroneous pair of declarations to
387appear together in a given scope:
388
389@smallexample
390typedef int foo;
391typedef foo foo;
392@end smallexample
393
394@item
395GCC treats all characters of identifiers as significant.  According to
396K&R-1 (2.2), ``No more than the first eight characters are significant,
397although more may be used.''.  Also according to K&R-1 (2.2), ``An
398identifier is a sequence of letters and digits; the first character must
399be a letter.  The underscore _ counts as a letter.'', but GCC also
400allows dollar signs in identifiers.
401
402@cindex whitespace
403@item
404PCC allows whitespace in the middle of compound assignment operators
405such as @samp{+=}.  GCC, following the ISO standard, does not
406allow this.
407
408@cindex apostrophes
409@cindex '
410@item
411GCC complains about unterminated character constants inside of
412preprocessing conditionals that fail.  Some programs have English
413comments enclosed in conditionals that are guaranteed to fail; if these
414comments contain apostrophes, GCC will probably report an error.  For
415example, this code would produce an error:
416
417@smallexample
418#if 0
419You can't expect this to work.
420#endif
421@end smallexample
422
423The best solution to such a problem is to put the text into an actual
424C comment delimited by @samp{/*@dots{}*/}.
425
426@item
427Many user programs contain the declaration @samp{long time ();}.  In the
428past, 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
430return.  But in systems with ISO C headers, @code{time} is declared to
431return @code{time_t}, and if that is not the same as @code{long}, then
432@samp{long time ();} is erroneous.
433
434The 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
437use @code{time_t} as the return type of @code{time}.
438
439@cindex @code{float} as function value type
440@item
441When compiling functions that return @code{float}, PCC converts it to
442a double.  GCC actually returns a @code{float}.  If you are concerned
443with PCC compatibility, you should declare your functions to return
444@code{double}; you might as well say what you mean.
445
446@cindex structures
447@cindex unions
448@item
449When compiling functions that return structures or unions, GCC
450output code normally uses a method different from that used on most
451versions of Unix.  As a result, code compiled with GCC cannot call
452a structure-returning function compiled with PCC, and vice versa.
453
454The method used by GCC is as follows: a structure or union which is
4551, 2, 4 or 8 bytes long is returned like a scalar.  A structure or union
456with 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
458on the stack).  The target hook @code{TARGET_STRUCT_VALUE_RTX}
459tells GCC where to pass this address.
460
461By contrast, PCC on most target machines returns structures and unions
462of any size by copying the data into an area of static storage, and then
463returning the address of that storage as if it were a pointer value.
464The caller must copy the data from that memory area to the place where
465the value is wanted.  GCC does not use this method because it is
466slower and nonreentrant.
467
468On some newer machines, PCC uses a reentrant convention for all
469structure and union returning.  GCC on most of these machines uses a
470compatible convention when returning structures and unions in memory,
471but still returns small structures and unions in registers.
472
473@opindex fpcc-struct-return
474You can tell GCC to use a compatible convention for all structure and
475union returning with the option @option{-fpcc-struct-return}.
476
477@cindex preprocessing tokens
478@cindex preprocessing numbers
479@item
480GCC complains about program fragments such as @samp{0x74ae-0x4000}
481which appear to be two hexadecimal constants separated by the minus
482operator.  Actually, this string is a single @dfn{preprocessing token}.
483Each such token must correspond to one token in C@.  Since this does not,
484GCC prints an error message.  Although it may appear obvious that what
485is meant is an operator and two values, the ISO C standard specifically
486requires that this be treated as erroneous.
487
488A @dfn{preprocessing token} is a @dfn{preprocessing number} if it
489begins with a digit and is followed by letters, underscores, digits,
490periods and @samp{e+}, @samp{e-}, @samp{E+}, @samp{E-}, @samp{p+},
491@samp{p-}, @samp{P+}, or @samp{P-} character sequences.  (In strict C89
492mode, the sequences @samp{p+}, @samp{p-}, @samp{P+} and @samp{P-} cannot
493appear in preprocessing numbers.)
494
495To make the above program fragment valid, place whitespace in front of
496the minus sign.  This whitespace will end the preprocessing number.
497@end itemize
498
499@node Fixed Headers
500@section Fixed Header Files
501
502GCC needs to install corrected versions of some system header files.
503This is because most target systems have some header files that won't
504work with GCC unless they are changed.  Some have bugs, some are
505incompatible with ISO C, and some depend on special features of other
506compilers.
507
508Installing GCC automatically creates and installs the fixed header
509files, by running a program called @code{fixincludes}.  Normally, you
510don't need to pay attention to this.  But there are cases where it
511doesn't do the right thing automatically.
512
513@itemize @bullet
514@item
515If you update the system's header files, such as by installing a new
516system version, the fixed header files of GCC are not automatically
517updated.  They can be updated using the @command{mkheaders} script
518installed in
519@file{@var{libexecdir}/gcc/@var{target}/@var{version}/install-tools/}.
520
521@item
522On some systems, header file directories contain
523machine-specific symbolic links in certain places.  This makes it
524possible to share most of the header files among hosts running the
525same version of the system on different machine models.
526
527The programs that fix the header files do not understand this special
528way of using symbolic links; therefore, the directory of fixed header
529files is good only for the machine model used to build it.
530
531It is possible to make separate sets of fixed header files for the
532different machine models, and arrange a structure of symbolic links so
533as to use the proper set, but you'll have to do this by hand.
534@end itemize
535
536@node Standard Libraries
537@section Standard Libraries
538
539@opindex Wall
540GCC by itself attempts to be a conforming freestanding implementation.
541@xref{Standards,,Language Standards Supported by GCC}, for details of
542what this means.  Beyond the library facilities required of such an
543implementation, the rest of the C library is supplied by the vendor of
544the operating system.  If that C library doesn't conform to the C
545standards, then your programs might get warnings (especially when using
546@option{-Wall}) that you don't expect.
547
548For 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
551this function match the Standard, but that would be wrong, since the
552function will still return @code{char *}.
553
554If you need a Standard compliant library, then you need to find one, as
555GCC does not provide one.  The GNU C library (called @code{glibc})
556provides ISO C, POSIX, BSD, SystemV and X/Open compatibility for
557GNU/Linux and HURD-based GNU systems; no recent version of it supports
558other systems, though some very old versions did.  Version 2.2 of the
559GNU C library includes nearly complete C99 support.  You could also ask
560your operating system vendor if newer libraries are available.
561
562@node Disappointments
563@section Disappointments and Misunderstandings
564
565These problems are perhaps regrettable, but we don't know any practical
566way around them.
567
568@itemize @bullet
569@item
570Certain local variables aren't recognized by debuggers when you compile
571with optimization.
572
573This occurs because sometimes GCC optimizes the variable out of
574existence.  There is no way to tell the debugger how to compute the
575value such a variable ``would have had'', and it is not clear that would
576be desirable anyway.  So GCC simply does not mention the eliminated
577variable when it writes debugging information.
578
579You have to expect a certain amount of disagreement between the
580executable and your source code, when you use optimization.
581
582@cindex conflicting types
583@cindex scope of declaration
584@item
585Users often think it is a bug when GCC reports an error for code
586like this:
587
588@smallexample
589int foo (struct mumble *);
590
591struct mumble @{ @dots{} @};
592
593int foo (struct mumble *x)
594@{ @dots{} @}
595@end smallexample
596
597This code really is erroneous, because the scope of @code{struct
598mumble} in the prototype is limited to the argument list containing it.
599It does not refer to the @code{struct mumble} defined with file scope
600immediately below---they are two unrelated types with similar names in
601different scopes.
602
603But in the definition of @code{foo}, the file-scope type is used
604because that is available to be inherited.  Thus, the definition and
605the prototype do not match, and you get an error.
606
607This behavior may seem silly, but it's what the ISO standard specifies.
608It is easy enough for you to make your code work by moving the
609definition of @code{struct mumble} above the prototype.  It's not worth
610being incompatible with ISO C just to avoid an error for the example
611shown above.
612
613@item
614Accesses to bit-fields even in volatile objects works by accessing larger
615objects, such as a byte or a word.  You cannot rely on what size of
616object is accessed in order to read or write the bit-field; it may even
617vary for a given bit-field according to the precise usage.
618
619If you care about controlling the amount of memory that is accessed, use
620volatile but do not use bit-fields.
621
622@item
623GCC comes with shell scripts to fix certain known problems in system
624header files.  They install corrected copies of various header files in
625a special directory where only GCC will normally look for them.  The
626scripts adapt to various systems by searching all the system header
627files for the problem cases that we know about.
628
629If new system header files are installed, nothing automatically arranges
630to 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/}.
633
634@item
635@cindex floating point precision
636On 68000 and x86 systems, for instance, you can get paradoxical results
637if you test the precise values of floating point numbers.  For example,
638you can find that a floating point value which is not a NaN is not equal
639to itself.  This results from the fact that the floating point registers
640hold a few more bits of precision than fit in a @code{double} in memory.
641Compiled code moves values between memory and floating point registers
642at its convenience, and moving them into memory truncates them.
643
644@opindex ffloat-store
645You can partially avoid this problem by using the @option{-ffloat-store}
646option (@pxref{Optimize Options}).
647
648@item
649On AIX and other platforms without weak symbol support, templates
650need to be instantiated explicitly and symbols for static members
651of templates will not be generated.
652
653@item
654On AIX, GCC scans object files and library archives for static
655constructors and destructors when linking an application before the
656linker prunes unreferenced symbols.  This is necessary to prevent the
657AIX linker from mistakenly assuming that static constructor or
658destructor are unused and removing them before the scanning can occur.
659All static constructors and destructors found will be referenced even
660though the modules in which they occur may not be used by the program.
661This may lead to both increased executable size and unexpected symbol
662references.
663@end itemize
664
665@node C++ Misunderstandings
666@section Common Misunderstandings with GNU C++
667
668@cindex misunderstandings in C++
669@cindex surprises in C++
670@cindex C++ misunderstandings
671C++ is a complex language and an evolving one, and its standard
672definition (the ISO C++ standard) was only recently completed.  As a
673result, your C++ compiler may occasionally surprise you, even when its
674behavior is correct.  This section discusses some areas that frequently
675give rise to questions of this sort.
676
677@menu
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
682@end menu
683
684@node Static Definitions
685@subsection Declare @emph{and} Define Static Members
686
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++
691When a class has static data members, it is not enough to @emph{declare}
692the static member; you must also @emph{define} it.  For example:
693
694@smallexample
695class Foo
696@{
697  @dots{}
698  void method();
699  static int bar;
700@};
701@end smallexample
702
703This 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
707standard, you must supply an initializer in one (and only one) source
708file, such as:
709
710@smallexample
711int Foo::bar = 0;
712@end smallexample
713
714Other C++ compilers may not correctly implement the standard behavior.
715As a result, when you switch to @command{g++} from one of these compilers,
716you may discover that a program that appeared to work correctly in fact
717does not conform to the standard: @command{g++} reports as undefined
718symbols any static data members that lack definitions.
719
720
721@node Name lookup
722@subsection Name lookup, templates, and accessing members of base classes
723
724@cindex base class members
725@cindex two-stage name lookup
726@cindex dependent name lookup
727
728The C++ standard prescribes that all names that are not dependent on
729template parameters are bound to their present definitions when parsing
730a template function or class.@footnote{The C++ standard just uses the
731term ``dependent'' for names that depend on the type or value of
732template parameters.  This shorter term will also be used in the rest of
733this section.}  Only names that are dependent are looked up at the point
734of instantiation.  For example, consider
735
736@smallexample
737  void foo(double);
738
739  struct A @{
740    template <typename T>
741    void f () @{
742      foo (1);        // @r{1}
743      int i = N;      // @r{2}
744      T t;
745      t.bar();        // @r{3}
746      foo (t);        // @r{4}
747    @}
748
749    static const int N;
750  @};
751@end smallexample
752
753Here, the names @code{foo} and @code{N} appear in a context that does
754not depend on the type of @code{T}.  The compiler will thus require that
755they are defined in the context of use in the template, not only before
756the point of instantiation, and will here use @code{::foo(double)} and
757@code{A::N}, respectively.  In particular, it will convert the integer
758value to a @code{double} when passing it to @code{::foo(double)}.
759
760Conversely, @code{bar} and the call to @code{foo} in the fourth marked
761line are used in contexts that do depend on the type of @code{T}, so
762they are only looked up at the point of instantiation, and you can
763provide declarations for them after declaring the template, but before
764instantiating it.  In particular, if you instantiate @code{A::f<int>},
765the last line will call an overloaded @code{::foo(int)} if one was
766provided, even if after the declaration of @code{struct A}.
767
768This distinction between lookup of dependent and non-dependent names is
769called two-stage (or dependent) name lookup.  G++ implements it
770since version 3.4.
771
772Two-stage name lookup sometimes leads to situations with behavior
773different from non-template codes.  The most common is probably this:
774
775@smallexample
776  template <typename T> struct Base @{
777    int i;
778  @};
779
780  template <typename T> struct Derived : public Base<T> @{
781    int get_i() @{ return i; @}
782  @};
783@end smallexample
784
785In @code{get_i()}, @code{i} is not used in a dependent context, so the
786compiler 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,
788since that is dependent and you may declare specializations of
789@code{Base} even after declaring @code{Derived}, so the compiler can't
790really know what @code{i} would refer to.  If there is no global
791variable @code{i}, then you will get an error message.
792
793In order to make it clear that you want the member of the base class,
794you need to defer lookup until instantiation time, at which the base
795class is known.  For this, you need to access @code{i} in a dependent
796context, by either using @code{this->i} (remember that @code{this} is of
797type @code{Derived<T>*}, so is obviously dependent), or using
798@code{Base<T>::i}.  Alternatively, @code{Base<T>::i} might be brought
799into scope by a @code{using}-declaration.
800
801Another, similar example involves calling member functions of a base
802class:
803
804@smallexample
805  template <typename T> struct Base @{
806      int f();
807  @};
808
809  template <typename T> struct Derived : Base<T> @{
810      int g() @{ return f(); @};
811  @};
812@end smallexample
813
814Again, 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
816not otherwise specified that the call should be in a dependent context).
817Thus a global declaration of such a function must be available, since
818the one in the base class is not visible until instantiation time.  The
819compiler will consequently produce the following error message:
820
821@smallexample
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)
827@end smallexample
828
829To make the code valid either use @code{this->f()}, or
830@code{Base<T>::f()}.  Using the @option{-fpermissive} flag will also let
831the compiler accept the code, by marking all function calls for which no
832declaration is visible at the time of definition of the template for
833later lookup at instantiation time, as if it were a dependent call.
834We do not recommend using @option{-fpermissive} to work around invalid
835code, and it will also only catch cases where functions in base classes
836are called, not where variables in base classes are used (as in the
837example above).
838
839Note that some compilers (including G++ versions prior to 3.4) get these
840examples wrong and accept above code without an error.  Those compilers
841do not implement two-stage name lookup correctly.
842
843
844@node Temporaries
845@subsection Temporaries May Vanish Before You Expect
846
847@cindex temporaries, lifetime of
848@cindex portions of temporary objects, pointers to
849It is dangerous to use pointers or references to @emph{portions} of a
850temporary object.  The compiler may very well delete the object before
851you expect it to, leaving a pointer to garbage.  The most common place
852where this problem crops up is in classes like string classes,
853especially ones that define a conversion function to type @code{char *}
854or @code{const char *}---which is one reason why the standard
855@code{string} class requires you to call the @code{c_str} member
856function.  However, any class that returns a pointer to some internal
857structure is potentially subject to this problem.
858
859For example, a program may use a function @code{strfunc} that returns
860@code{string} objects, and another function @code{charfunc} that
861operates on pointers to @code{char}:
862
863@smallexample
864string strfunc ();
865void charfunc (const char *);
866
867void
868f ()
869@{
870  const char *p = strfunc().c_str();
871  @dots{}
872  charfunc (p);
873  @dots{}
874  charfunc (p);
875@}
876@end smallexample
877
878@noindent
879In this situation, it may seem reasonable to save a pointer to the C
880string returned by the @code{c_str} member function and use that rather
881than call @code{c_str} repeatedly.  However, the temporary string
882created by the call to @code{strfunc} is destroyed after @code{p} is
883initialized, at which point @code{p} is left pointing to freed memory.
884
885Code like this may run successfully under some other compilers,
886particularly obsolete cfront-based compilers that delete temporaries
887along with normal local variables.  However, the GNU C++ behavior is
888standard-conforming, so if your program depends on late destruction of
889temporaries it is not portable.
890
891The safe way to write such code is to give the temporary a name, which
892forces it to remain until the end of the scope of the name.  For
893example:
894
895@smallexample
896const string& tmp = strfunc ();
897charfunc (tmp.c_str ());
898@end smallexample
899
900@node Copy Assignment
901@subsection Implicit Copy-Assignment for Virtual Bases
902
903When a base class is virtual, only one subobject of the base class
904belongs to each full object.  Also, the constructors and destructors are
905invoked only once, and called from the most-derived class.  However, such
906objects behave unspecified when being assigned.  For example:
907
908@smallexample
909struct Base@{
910  char *name;
911  Base(char *n) : name(strdup(n))@{@}
912  Base& operator= (const Base& other)@{
913   free (name);
914   name = strdup (other.name);
915  @}
916@};
917
918struct A:virtual Base@{
919  int val;
920  A():Base("A")@{@}
921@};
922
923struct B:virtual Base@{
924  int bval;
925  B():Base("B")@{@}
926@};
927
928struct Derived:public A, public B@{
929  Derived():Base("Derived")@{@}
930@};
931
932void func(Derived &d1, Derived &d2)
933@{
934  d1 = d2;
935@}
936@end smallexample
937
938The C++ standard specifies that @samp{Base::Base} is only called once
939when constructing or copy-constructing a Derived object.  It is
940unspecified whether @samp{Base::operator=} is called more than once when
941the implicit copy-assignment for Derived objects is invoked (as it is
942inside @samp{func} in the example).
943
944G++ implements the ``intuitive'' algorithm for copy-assignment: assign all
945direct bases, then assign all members.  In that algorithm, the virtual
946base subobject can be encountered more than once.  In the example, copying
947proceeds in the following order: @samp{val}, @samp{name} (via
948@code{strdup}), @samp{bval}, and @samp{name} again.
949
950If application code relies on copy-assignment, a user-defined
951copy-assignment operator removes any uncertainties.  With such an
952operator, the application can define whether and how the virtual base
953subobject is assigned.
954
955@node Protoize Caveats
956@section Caveats of using @command{protoize}
957
958The conversion programs @command{protoize} and @command{unprotoize} can
959sometimes change a source file in a way that won't work unless you
960rearrange it.
961
962@itemize @bullet
963@item
964@command{protoize} can insert references to a type name or type tag before
965the definition, or in a file where they are not defined.
966
967If this happens, compiler error messages should show you where the new
968references are, so fixing the file by hand is straightforward.
969
970@item
971There are some C constructs which @command{protoize} cannot figure out.
972For example, it can't determine argument types for declaring a
973pointer-to-function variable; this you must do by hand.  @command{protoize}
974inserts a comment containing @samp{???} each time it finds such a
975variable; so you can find all such variables by searching for this
976string.  ISO C does not require declaring the argument types of
977pointer-to-function types.
978
979@item
980Using @command{unprotoize} can easily introduce bugs.  If the program
981relied on prototypes to bring about conversion of arguments, these
982conversions will not take place in the program without prototypes.
983One case in which you can be sure @command{unprotoize} is safe is when
984you are removing prototypes that were made with @command{protoize}; if
985the program worked before without any prototypes, it will work again
986without them.
987
988@opindex Wconversion
989You can find all the places where this problem might occur by compiling
990the program with the @option{-Wconversion} option.  It prints a warning
991whenever an argument is converted.
992
993@item
994Both conversion programs can be confused if there are macro calls in and
995around the text to be converted.  In other words, the standard syntax
996for a declaration or definition must not result from expanding a macro.
997This problem is inherent in the design of C and cannot be fixed.  If
998only a few functions have confusing macro calls, you can easily convert
999them manually.
1000
1001@item
1002@command{protoize} cannot get the argument types for a function whose
1003definition was not actually compiled due to preprocessing conditionals.
1004When this happens, @command{protoize} changes nothing in regard to such
1005a function.  @command{protoize} tries to detect such instances and warn
1006about them.
1007
1008You can generally work around this problem by using @command{protoize} step
1009by step, each time specifying a different set of @option{-D} options for
1010compilation, until all of the functions have been converted.  There is
1011no automatic way to verify that you have got them all, however.
1012
1013@item
1014Confusion may result if there is an occasion to convert a function
1015declaration or definition in a region of source code where there is more
1016than one formal parameter list present.  Thus, attempts to convert code
1017containing multiple (conditionally compiled) versions of a single
1018function header (in the same vicinity) may not produce the desired (or
1019expected) results.
1020
1021If you plan on converting source files which contain such code, it is
1022recommended that you first make sure that each conditionally compiled
1023region of source code which contains an alternative function header also
1024contains at least one additional follower token (past the final right
1025parenthesis of the function header).  This should circumvent the
1026problem.
1027
1028@item
1029@command{unprotoize} can become confused when trying to convert a function
1030definition or declaration which contains a declaration for a
1031pointer-to-function formal argument which has the same name as the
1032function being defined or declared.  We recommend you avoid such choices
1033of formal parameter names.
1034
1035@item
1036You might also want to correct some of the indentation by hand and break
1037long lines.  (The conversion programs don't write lines longer than
1038eighty characters in any case.)
1039@end itemize
1040
1041@node Non-bugs
1042@section Certain Changes We Don't Want to Make
1043
1044This section lists changes that people frequently request, but which
1045we do not make because we think GCC is better without them.
1046
1047@itemize @bullet
1048@item
1049Checking the number and type of arguments to a function which has an
1050old-fashioned definition and no prototype.
1051
1052Such a feature would work only occasionally---only for calls that appear
1053in the same file as the called function, following the definition.  The
1054only way to check all calls reliably is to add a prototype for the
1055function.  But adding a prototype eliminates the motivation for this
1056feature.  So the feature is not worthwhile.
1057
1058@item
1059Warning about using an expression whose type is signed as a shift count.
1060
1061Shift count operands are probably signed more often than unsigned.
1062Warning about this would cause far more annoyance than good.
1063
1064@item
1065Warning about assigning a signed value to an unsigned variable.
1066
1067Such assignments must be very common; warning about them would cause
1068more annoyance than good.
1069
1070@item
1071Warning when a non-void function value is ignored.
1072
1073C contains many standard functions that return a value that most
1074programs choose to ignore.  One obvious example is @code{printf}.
1075Warning about this practice only leads the defensive programmer to
1076clutter programs with dozens of casts to @code{void}.  Such casts are
1077required so frequently that they become visual noise.  Writing those
1078casts becomes so automatic that they no longer convey useful
1079information about the intentions of the programmer.  For functions
1080where the return value should never be ignored, use the
1081@code{warn_unused_result} function attribute (@pxref{Function
1082Attributes}).
1083
1084@item
1085@opindex fshort-enums
1086Making @option{-fshort-enums} the default.
1087
1088This would cause storage layout to be incompatible with most other C
1089compilers.  And it doesn't seem very important, given that you can get
1090the same result in other ways.  The case where it matters most is when
1091the enumeration-valued object is inside a structure, and in that case
1092you can specify a field width explicitly.
1093
1094@item
1095Making bit-fields unsigned by default on particular machines where ``the
1096ABI standard'' says to do so.
1097
1098The ISO C standard leaves it up to the implementation whether a bit-field
1099declared plain @code{int} is signed or not.  This in effect creates two
1100alternative dialects of C@.
1101
1102@opindex fsigned-bitfields
1103@opindex funsigned-bitfields
1104The GNU C compiler supports both dialects; you can specify the signed
1105dialect with @option{-fsigned-bitfields} and the unsigned dialect with
1106@option{-funsigned-bitfields}.  However, this leaves open the question of
1107which dialect to use by default.
1108
1109Currently, the preferred dialect makes plain bit-fields signed, because
1110this is simplest.  Since @code{int} is the same as @code{signed int} in
1111every other context, it is cleanest for them to be the same in bit-fields
1112as well.
1113
1114Some computer manufacturers have published Application Binary Interface
1115standards which specify that plain bit-fields should be unsigned.  It is
1116a mistake, however, to say anything about this issue in an ABI@.  This is
1117because the handling of plain bit-fields distinguishes two dialects of C@.
1118Both dialects are meaningful on every type of machine.  Whether a
1119particular object file was compiled using signed bit-fields or unsigned
1120is of no concern to other object files, even if they access the same
1121bit-fields in the same data structures.
1122
1123A given program is written in one or the other of these two dialects.
1124The program stands a chance to work on most any machine if it is
1125compiled with the proper dialect.  It is unlikely to work at all if
1126compiled with the wrong dialect.
1127
1128Many users appreciate the GNU C compiler because it provides an
1129environment that is uniform across machines.  These users would be
1130inconvenienced if the compiler treated plain bit-fields differently on
1131certain machines.
1132
1133Occasionally users write programs intended only for a particular machine
1134type.  On these occasions, the users would benefit if the GNU C compiler
1135were to support by default the same dialect as the other compilers on
1136that machine.  But such applications are rare.  And users writing a
1137program to run on more than one type of machine cannot possibly benefit
1138from this kind of compatibility.
1139
1140This is why GCC does and will treat plain bit-fields in the same
1141fashion on all types of machines (by default).
1142
1143There are some arguments for making bit-fields unsigned by default on all
1144machines.  If, for example, this becomes a universal de facto standard,
1145it would make sense for GCC to go along with it.  This is something
1146to be considered in the future.
1147
1148(Of course, users strongly concerned about portability should indicate
1149explicitly in each bit-field whether it is signed or not.  In this way,
1150they write programs which have the same meaning in both C dialects.)
1151
1152@item
1153@opindex ansi
1154@opindex std
1155Undefining @code{__STDC__} when @option{-ansi} is not used.
1156
1157Currently, GCC defines @code{__STDC__} unconditionally.  This provides
1158good results in practice.
1159
1160Programmers normally use conditionals on @code{__STDC__} to ask whether
1161it is safe to use certain features of ISO C, such as function
1162prototypes or ISO token concatenation.  Since plain @command{gcc} supports
1163all the features of ISO C, the correct answer to these questions is
1164``yes''.
1165
1166Some users try to use @code{__STDC__} to check for the availability of
1167certain library facilities.  This is actually incorrect usage in an ISO
1168C program, because the ISO C standard says that a conforming
1169freestanding implementation should define @code{__STDC__} even though it
1170does not have the library facilities.  @samp{gcc -ansi -pedantic} is a
1171conforming freestanding implementation, and it is therefore required to
1172define @code{__STDC__}, even though it does not come with an ISO C
1173library.
1174
1175Sometimes people say that defining @code{__STDC__} in a compiler that
1176does not completely conform to the ISO C standard somehow violates the
1177standard.  This is illogical.  The standard is a standard for compilers
1178that claim to support ISO C, such as @samp{gcc -ansi}---not for other
1179compilers such as plain @command{gcc}.  Whatever the ISO C standard says
1180is relevant to the design of plain @command{gcc} without @option{-ansi} only
1181for pragmatic reasons, not as a requirement.
1182
1183GCC normally defines @code{__STDC__} to be 1, and in addition
1184defines @code{__STRICT_ANSI__} if you specify the @option{-ansi} option,
1185or a @option{-std} option for strict conformance to some version of ISO C@.
1186On some hosts, system include files use a different convention, where
1187@code{__STDC__} is normally 0, but is 1 if the user specifies strict
1188conformance to the C Standard.  GCC follows the host convention when
1189processing system include files, but when processing user files it follows
1190the usual GNU C convention.
1191
1192@item
1193Undefining @code{__STDC__} in C++.
1194
1195Programs written to compile with C++-to-C translators get the
1196value of @code{__STDC__} that goes with the C compiler that is
1197subsequently used.  These programs must test @code{__STDC__}
1198to determine what kind of C preprocessor that compiler uses:
1199whether they should concatenate tokens in the ISO C fashion
1200or in the traditional fashion.
1201
1202These programs work properly with GNU C++ if @code{__STDC__} is defined.
1203They would not work otherwise.
1204
1205In addition, many header files are written to provide prototypes in ISO
1206C but not in traditional C@.  Many of these header files can work without
1207change in C++ provided @code{__STDC__} is defined.  If @code{__STDC__}
1208is not defined, they will all fail, and will all need to be changed to
1209test explicitly for C++ as well.
1210
1211@item
1212Deleting ``empty'' loops.
1213
1214Historically, GCC has not deleted ``empty'' loops under the
1215assumption that the most likely reason you would put one in a program is
1216to have a delay, so deleting them will not make real programs run any
1217faster.
1218
1219However, the rationale here is that optimization of a nonempty loop
1220cannot produce an empty one. This held for carefully written C compiled
1221with less powerful optimizers but is not always the case for carefully
1222written C++ or with more powerful optimizers.
1223Thus GCC will remove operations from loops whenever it can determine
1224those operations are not externally visible (apart from the time taken
1225to execute them, of course).  In case the loop can be proved to be finite,
1226GCC will also remove the loop itself.
1227
1228Be aware of this when performing timing tests, for instance the
1229following loop can be completely removed, provided
1230@code{some_expression} can provably not change any global state.
1231
1232@smallexample
1233@{
1234   int sum = 0;
1235   int ix;
1236
1237   for (ix = 0; ix != 10000; ix++)
1238      sum += some_expression;
1239@}
1240@end smallexample
1241
1242Even though @code{sum} is accumulated in the loop, no use is made of
1243that summation, so the accumulation can be removed.
1244
1245@item
1246Making side effects happen in the same order as in some other compiler.
1247
1248@cindex side effects, order of evaluation
1249@cindex order of evaluation, side effects
1250It is never safe to depend on the order of evaluation of side effects.
1251For example, a function call like this may very well behave differently
1252from one compiler to another:
1253
1254@smallexample
1255void func (int, int);
1256
1257int i = 2;
1258func (i++, i++);
1259@end smallexample
1260
1261There is no guarantee (in either the C or the C++ standard language
1262definitions) that the increments will be evaluated in any particular
1263order.  Either increment might happen first.  @code{func} might get the
1264arguments @samp{2, 3}, or it might get @samp{3, 2}, or even @samp{2, 2}.
1265
1266@item
1267Making certain warnings into errors by default.
1268
1269Some ISO C testsuites report failure when the compiler does not produce
1270an error message for a certain program.
1271
1272@opindex pedantic-errors
1273ISO C requires a ``diagnostic'' message for certain kinds of invalid
1274programs, but a warning is defined by GCC to count as a diagnostic.  If
1275GCC produces a warning but not an error, that is correct ISO C support.
1276If testsuites call this ``failure'', they should be run with the GCC
1277option @option{-pedantic-errors}, which will turn these warnings into
1278errors.
1279
1280@end itemize
1281
1282@node Warnings and Errors
1283@section Warning Messages and Error Messages
1284
1285@cindex error messages
1286@cindex warnings vs errors
1287@cindex messages, warning and error
1288The GNU compiler can produce two kinds of diagnostics: errors and
1289warnings.  Each kind has a different purpose:
1290
1291@itemize @w{}
1292@item
1293@dfn{Errors} report problems that make it impossible to compile your
1294program.  GCC reports errors with the source file name and line
1295number where the problem is apparent.
1296
1297@item
1298@dfn{Warnings} report other unusual conditions in your code that
1299@emph{may} indicate a problem, although compilation can (and does)
1300proceed.  Warning messages also report the source file name and line
1301number, but include the text @samp{warning:} to distinguish them
1302from error messages.
1303@end itemize
1304
1305Warnings may indicate danger points where you should check to make sure
1306that your program really does what you intend; or the use of obsolete
1307features; or the use of nonstandard features of GNU C or C++.  Many
1308warnings are issued only if you ask for them, with one of the @option{-W}
1309options (for instance, @option{-Wall} requests a variety of useful
1310warnings).
1311
1312@opindex pedantic
1313@opindex pedantic-errors
1314GCC always tries to compile your program if possible; it never
1315gratuitously rejects a program whose meaning is clear merely because
1316(for instance) it fails to conform to a standard.  In some cases,
1317however, the C and C++ standards specify that certain extensions are
1318forbidden, and a diagnostic @emph{must} be issued by a conforming
1319compiler.  The @option{-pedantic} option tells GCC to issue warnings in
1320such cases; @option{-pedantic-errors} says to make them errors instead.
1321This does not mean that @emph{all} non-ISO constructs get warnings
1322or errors.
1323
1324@xref{Warning Options,,Options to Request or Suppress Warnings}, for
1325more detail on these and related command-line options.
1326