RE: [CIL users] Incorrect translation of static variable initialisation

[Matt H. <ma...@cs...>]

Hi,
 
A missing initializer for a global variable means that the compiler should
initialize that value to zero.  So the two initializers are equivalent. 
 
If your analysis needs to see explictly that the fourth element of foo is
initialized to {0,0}, you can use foldLeftCompoundAll.
 
 
-- Matt


  _____  

From: cil...@li...
[mailto:cil...@li...] On Behalf Of hongruan
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2006 1:08 AM
To: Bug report for cil; cil-mail-list
Subject: [CIL users] Incorrect translation of static variable
initialisation


I try to compile the following code using CIL:
----------------test2.c start ----------------
struct foo{
 unsigned long a;
 unsigned long b;
};
 
static struct foo foos[]={
 {1,0},
 {2,0},
 {3,0},
 {},
};
 
int 
main(void)
{
    return 0; 
}
----------------test2.c end ------------------
 
The commands I used are the following:
----------------------------------------------
$gcc -E test2.c -o test2.i
$cilly.asm.exe --keepunused --out test2.cil.c test2.i
$gcc -c test2.cil.c -o test2.i
----------------------------------------------
 
But the context of the test2.cil.c is the following:
--------------test2.cil.c start---------------------
/* Generated by CIL v. 1.3.4 */
/* print_CIL_Input is true */
 
#line 1 "test2.c"
struct foo {
   unsigned long a ;
   unsigned long b ;
};
#line 6 "test2.c"
static struct foo foos[3]  = {      {1UL, 0UL}, 
        {2UL, 0UL}, 
        {3UL, 0UL}};
#line 13 "test2.c"
int main(void) 
{ 
 
  {
#line 16
  return (0);
}
}
--------------test2.cil.c end-----------------------
 
BUT I think the result of struct foo foos[] should be translated into the
following:
----------------------------------------------------
#line 6 "test2.c"
static struct foo foos[4]  = {      {1UL, 0UL}, 
        {2UL, 0UL}, 
        {3UL, 0UL}
        {0UL, 0UL}};
----------------------------------------------------
 
Maybe It is a bug about CIL.
 
Thanks a lot!
 
Camelguo