===================================================================
@@ -2317,6 +2317,14 @@
case RETURN_EXPR:
if (contains_array_notation_expr (t))
t = fix_return_expr (t);
+ return t;
+ case ARRAY_NOTATION_REF:
+ /* IF we are here, then we are dealing with cases like this:
+ A[:];
+ A[x:y:z];
+ A[x:y];
+ Replace those with just void zero node. */
+ t = void_zero_node;
default:
return t;
}
===================================================================
@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+/* { dg-options "-fcilkplus" } */
+
+int A[10];
+
+int main () {
+ char c = (char)N; /* { dg-error "undeclared" } */
+ short s = (short)N;
+ long l = (long)N;
+ A[l:s:c];
+}
+
+/* { dg-message "note: each" "defined" { target *-*-* } 7 } */
+
Hello Everyone, This patch below should fix the bug reported in PR 57541. The following statements were not caught by the array notation expander, and they should be caught and replaced with zero nodes: A[:]; A[x:y]; A[x:y:z]; Here are the Changelogs gcc/c/ChangeLog 2013-06-07 Balaji V. Iyer <balaji.v.iyer@intel.com> * c-array-notation.c (expand_array_notation_exprs): Added ARRAY_NOTATION_REF case. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog 2013-06-07 Balaji V. Iyer <balaji.v.iyer@intel.com> PR middle-end/57541 * c-c++-common/cilk-plus/AN/pr57541.c: New test case. ... and the patch cut and pasted below: Since this is a trivial patch, I will commit this in. I am willing to revert it (and/or fix it) if anyone has objections. Thanks, Balaji V. Iyer.