diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'contrib/gcc/bugs.html')
-rw-r--r-- | contrib/gcc/bugs.html | 698 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 698 deletions
diff --git a/contrib/gcc/bugs.html b/contrib/gcc/bugs.html deleted file mode 100644 index a8dab54..0000000 --- a/contrib/gcc/bugs.html +++ /dev/null @@ -1,698 +0,0 @@ -<html> - -<head> -<title>GCC Bugs</title> -</head> - -<body> -<h1>GCC Bugs</h1> - -<p>The latest version of this document is always available at -<a href="http://www.gnu.org/software/gcc/bugs.html">http://www.gnu.org/software/gcc/bugs.html</a>.</p> - -<hr /> - -<h2>Table of Contents</h2> -<ul> -<li><a href="#report">Reporting Bugs</a> - <ul> - <li><a href="#need">What we need</a></li> - <li><a href="#dontwant">What we DON'T want</a></li> - <li><a href="#where">Where to post it</a></li> - <li><a href="#detailed">Detailed bug reporting instructions</a></li> - <li><a href="#gnat">Detailed bug reporting instructions for GNAT</a></li> - </ul> -</li> -<li><a href="#manage">Managing Bugs (GNATS and the test-suite)</a></li> -<li><a href="#known">Frequently Reported Bugs in GCC</a> - <ul> - <li><a href="#general">General</a></li> - <li><a href="#fortran">Fortran</a></li> - <li><a href="#c">C</a></li> - <li><a href="#cplusplus">C++</a> - <ul> - <li><a href="#updating">Common problems updating from G++ 2.95 to - G++ 3.0</a></li> - <li><a href="#nonbugs">Non-bugs</a></li> - <li><a href="#missing">Missing features</a></li> - <li><a href="#parsing">Parse errors for "simple" code</a></li> - <li><a href="#-O3">Optimization at <code>-O3</code> takes a - very long time</a></li> - </ul> - </li> - </ul> - </li> -</ul> - -<hr /> - -<h1><a name="report">Reporting Bugs</a></h1> - -<p>Our preferred way of receiving bugs is via the -<a href="gnats.html">GCC GNATS bug reporting system</a>.</p> - -<p>Before you report a bug, please check the -<a href="#known">list of well-known bugs</a> and, <strong>if possible -in any way, try a current development snapshot</strong>. -If you want to report a bug with versions of GCC before 3.1 we strongly -recommend upgrading to the current release first.</p> - -<p>Before reporting that GCC compiles your code incorrectly, please -compile it with <code>gcc -Wall</code> and see whether this shows -anything wrong with your code that could be the cause instead of a bug -in GCC.</p> - -<h2>Summarized bug reporting instructions</h2> - -<p>After this summary, you'll find detailed bug reporting -instructions, that explain how to obtain some of the information -requested in this summary.</p> - -<h3><a name="need">What we need</a></h3> - -Please include in your bug report all of the following items, the first -three of which can be obtained from the output of <code>gcc -v</code>: - -<ul> - <li>the exact version of GCC;</li> - <li>the system type;</li> - <li>the options given when GCC was configured/built;</li> - <li>the complete command line that triggers the bug;</li> - <li>the compiler output (error messages, warnings, etc.); and</li> - <li>the <em>preprocessed</em> file (<code>*.i*</code>) that triggers the - bug, generated by adding <code>-save-temps</code> to the complete - compilation command, or, in the case of a bug report for the GNAT front end, - a complete set of source files (see below).</li> -</ul> - -<h3><a name="dontwant">What we do <strong>not</strong> want</a></h3> - -<ul> - <li>A source file that <code>#include</code>s header files that are left - out of the bug report (see above)</li> - - <li>That source file and a collection of header files.</li> - - <li>An attached archive (tar, zip, shar, whatever) containing all - (or some :-) of the above.</li> - - <li>A code snippet that won't cause the compiler to produce the - exact output mentioned in the bug report (e.g., a snippet with just - a few lines around the one that <b>apparently</b> triggers the bug, - with some pieces replaced with ellipses or comments for extra - obfuscation :-)</li> - - <li>The location (URL) of the package that failed to build (we won't - download it, anyway, since you've already given us what we need to - duplicate the bug, haven't you? :-)</li> - - <li>An error that occurs only some of the times a certain file is - compiled, such that retrying a sufficient number of times results in - a successful compilation; this is a symptom of a hardware problem, - not of a compiler bug (sorry)</li> - - <li>E-mail messages that complement previous, incomplete bug - reports. Post a new, self-contained, full bug report instead, if - possible as a follow-up to the original bug report</li> - - <li>Assembly files (<code>*.s</code>) produced by the compiler, or any - binary files, such as object files, executables or core files</li> - - <li>Duplicate bug reports, or reports of bugs already fixed in the - development tree, especially those that have already been reported - as fixed last week :-)</li> - - <li>Bugs in the assembler, the linker or the C library. These are - separate projects, with separate mailing lists and different bug - reporting procedures</li> - - <li>Bugs in releases or snapshots of GCC not issued by the GNU - Project. Report them to whoever provided you with the release</li> - - <li>Questions about the correctness or the expected behavior of - certain constructs that are not GCC extensions. Ask them in forums - dedicated to the discussion of the programming language</li> -</ul> - -<h3><a name="where">Where to post it</a></h3> - -<p>Please submit your bug report directly to the -<a href="gnats.html">GCC GNATS bug database</a>. -Only if this is not possible, mail all information to -<a href="mailto:bug-gcc@gnu.org">bug-gcc@gnu.org</a> or -<a href="mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org">gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org</a>.</p> - -<p>The GCC lists have message size limits (200 kbytes) and bug reports -over those limits will currently be bounced. If your bug is larger -than that, please post it using the <a href="gnats.html">GCC GNATS bug -database</a>.</p> - -<h2><a name="detailed">Detailed bug reporting instructions</a></h2> - -<p>Please refer to the <a href="#gnat">next section</a> when reporting -bugs in GNAT, the Ada compiler.</p> - -<p>In general, all the information we need can be obtained by -collecting the command line below, as well as its output and the -preprocessed file it generates.</p> - -<blockquote><code>gcc -v -save-temps <i>all-your-options -source-file</i></code></blockquote> - -<p>Typically the preprocessed file (extension <code>.i</code> for C or -<code>.ii</code> for C++) will be large, so please compress the -resulting file with one of the popular compression programs such as -bzip2, gzip, zip or compress (in -decreasing order of preference). Use maximum compression -(<code>-9</code>) if available. Please include the compressed -preprocessor output in your bug report, even if the source code is -freely available elsewhere; it makes the job of our volunteer testers -much easier.</p> - -<p>The <b>only</b> excuses to not send us the preprocessed sources are -(i) if you've found a bug in the preprocessor, or (ii) if you've -reduced the testcase to a small file that doesn't include any -other file. If you can't post the preprocessed sources because -they're proprietary code, then try to create a small file that -triggers the same problem.</p> - -<p>Since we're supposed to be able to re-create the assembly output -(extension <code>.s</code>), you usually should not include -it in the bug report, although you may want to post parts of it to -point out assembly code you consider to be wrong.</p> - -<p>Whether to use MIME attachments or <code>uuencode</code> is up to -you. In any case, make sure the compiler command line, version and -error output are in plain text, so that we don't have to decode the -bug report in order to tell who should take care of it. A meaningful -subject indicating language and platform also helps.</p> - -<p>Please avoid posting an archive (.tar, .shar or .zip); we generally -need just a single file to reproduce the bug (the .i/.ii preprocessed -file), and, by storing it in an archive, you're just making our -volunteers' jobs harder. Only when your bug report requires multiple -source files to be reproduced should you use an archive. In any case, -make sure the compiler version, error message, etc, are included in -the body of your bug report as plain text, even if needlessly -duplicated as part of an archive.</p> - -<p>If you fail to supply enough information for a bug report to be -reproduced, someone will probably ask you to post additional -information (or just ignore your bug report, if they're in a bad day, -so try to get it right on the first posting :-). In this case, please -post the additional information to the bug reporting mailing list, not -just to the person who requested it, unless explicitly told so. If -possible, please include in this follow-up all the information you had -supplied in the incomplete bug report (including the preprocessor -output), so that the new bug report is self-contained.</p> - -<h2><a name="gnat">Detailed bug reporting instructions for GNAT</a></h2> - -<p>See the <a href="#detailed">previous section</a> for bug reporting -instructions for GCC language implementations other than Ada.</p> - -<p>Bug reports have to contain at least the following information in -order to be useful:</p> - -<ul> -<li>the exact version of GCC, as shown by "<code>gcc -v</code>";</li> -<li>the system type;</li> -<li>the options when GCC was configured/built;</li> -<li>the exact command line passed to the <code>gcc</code> program -triggering the bug -(not just the flags passed to <code>gnatmake</code>, but -<code>gnatmake</code> prints the parameters it passed to <code>gcc</code>)</li> -<li>a collection of source files for reproducing the bug, -preferably a minimal set (see below);</li> -<li>a description of the expected behavior;</li> -<li>a description of actual behavior.</li> -</ul> - -<p>If your code depends on additional source files (usually package -specifications), submit the source code for these compilation units in -a single file that is acceptable input to <code>gnatchop</code>, -i.e. contains no non-Ada text. If the compilation terminated -normally, you can usually obtain a list of dependencies using the -"<code>gnatls -d <i>main_unit</i></code>" command, where -<code><i>main_unit</i></code> is the file name of the main compilation -unit (which is also passed to <code>gcc</code>).</p> - -<p>If you report a bug which causes the compiler to print a bug box, -include that bug box in your report, and do not forget to send all the -source files listed after the bug box along with your report.</p> - -<p>If you use <code>gnatprep</code>, be sure to send in preprocessed -sources (unless you have to report a bug in <code>gnatprep</code>).</p> - -<p>When you have checked that your report meets these criteria, please -submit it accoding to our <a href="#where">generic instructions</a>. -(If you use a mailing list for reporting, please include an -"<code>[Ada]</code>" tag in the subject.)</p> - -<h1><a name="manage">Managing Bugs (GNATS and the test-suite)</a></h1> - -<p>This section contains information mostly intended for GCC -contributors.</p> - -<p>If you find a bug, but you are not fixing it (yet):</p> -<ol> -<li>Create a (minimal) test-case.</li> -<li>Add the test-case to our test-suite, marking it as XFAIL unless -the bug is a regression.</li> -<li>Add a bug report referencing the test-case to GNATS.</li> -</ol> - -<p>If you fix a bug for which there is already a GNATS entry:</p> -<ol> -<li>Remove the XFAIL on the test-case.</li> -<li>Close the bug report in GNATS.</li> -</ol> - -<p>If you find a bug, and you are fixing it right then:</p> -<ol> -<li>Create a (minimal) test-case.</li> -<li>Add the test-case to our test-suite, marking it as PASS.</li> -<li>Check in your fixes.</li> -</ol> - -<hr /> - -<h1><a name="known">Frequently Reported Bugs in GCC</a></h1> - -<h2><a name="fortran">Fortran</a></h2> - -<p>Fortran bugs are documented in the G77 manual rather than -explicitly listed here. Please see -<a href="http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/g77/Trouble.html">Known Causes of -Trouble with GNU Fortran</a> in the G77 manual.</p> - -<hr /> - -<h2><a name="c">C</a></h2> - -<p>The following are not bugs in the C compiler, but are reported -often enough to warrant a mention here.</p> - -<dl> -<dt>Cannot initialize a static variable with <code>stdin</code>.</dt> -<dd><p>This has nothing to do with GCC, but people ask us about it a -lot. Code like this:</p> - -<blockquote><pre> -#include <stdio.h> - -FILE *yyin = stdin; -</pre></blockquote> - -<p>will not compile with GNU libc (GNU/Linux libc6), because -<code>stdin</code> is not a constant. This was done deliberately, to make -it easier to maintain binary compatibility when the type <code>FILE</code> -needs to be changed. It is surprising for people used to traditional Unix -C libraries, but it is permitted by the C standard.</p> - -<p>This construct commonly occurs in code generated by old versions of -lex or yacc. We suggest you try regenerating the parser with a -current version of flex or bison, respectively. In your own code, the -appropriate fix is to move the initialization to the beginning of -main.</p> - -<p>There is a common misconception that the GCC developers are -responsible for GNU libc. These are in fact two entirely separate -projects; please check the -<a href="http://www.gnu.org/software/glibc/">GNU libc web pages</a> -for details. -</p></dd> - -<dt>Cannot use preprocessor directive in macro arguments.</dt> -<dd><p>Let me guess... you wrote code that looks something like this:</p> -<blockquote><pre> - memcpy(dest, src, -#ifdef PLATFORM1 - 12 -#else - 24 -#endif - ); -</pre></blockquote> -<p>and you got a whole pile of error messages:</p> -<blockquote><code> - -test.c:11: warning: preprocessing directive not recognized within -macro arg<br /> -test.c:11: warning: preprocessing directive not recognized within -macro arg<br /> -test.c:11: warning: preprocessing directive not recognized within -macro arg<br /> -test.c: In function `foo':<br /> -test.c:6: undefined or invalid # directive<br /> -test.c:8: undefined or invalid # directive<br /> -test.c:9: parse error before `24'<br /> -test.c:10: undefined or invalid # directive<br /> -test.c:11: parse error before `#'<br /> -</code></blockquote> - -<p><strong>Update:</strong> As of GCC 3.2 this kind of construct is -always accepted and CPP will probably do what you expect, but see the -manual for detailed semantics.</p> - -<p>However, versions of GCC prior to 3.2 did not allow you to put -<code>#ifdef</code> (or any other directive) inside the arguments of a -macro. Your C library's <code><string.h></code> happens to -define <code>memcpy</code> as a macro - this is perfectly legitimate. -The code therefore would not compile.</p> - -<p>This kind of code is not portable. It is "undefined behavior" -according to the C standard; that means different compilers will do -different things with it. It is always possible to rewrite code which -uses conditionals inside macros so that it doesn't. You could write -the above example</p> -<blockquote><pre> -#ifdef PLATFORM1 - memcpy(dest, src, 12); -#else - memcpy(dest, src, 24); -#endif -</pre></blockquote> -<p>This is a bit more typing, but I personally think it's better style -in addition to being more portable.</p> - -<p>In recent versions of glibc, <code>printf</code> is among the -functions which are implemented as macros.</p></dd> -</dl> - -<hr /> - -<h2><a name="cplusplus">C++</a></h2> - -<p>This is the list of bugs (and non-bugs) in g++ (aka GNU C++) that -are reported very often, but not yet fixed. While it is certainly -better to fix bugs instead of documenting them, this document might -save people the effort of writing a bug report when the bug is already -well-known. <a href="#report">How to report bugs</a> tells you how to -report a bug.</p> - -<p>There are many reasons why reported bugs don't get fixed. It might -be difficult to fix, or fixing it might break compatibility. Often, -reports get a low priority when there is a simple work-around. In -particular, bugs caused by invalid C++ code have a simple work-around, -<em>fix the code</em>. Now that there is an agreed ISO/ANSI standard -for C++, the compiler has a definitive document to adhere to. Earlier -versions might have accepted source code that is <em>no longer</em> -C++. This means that code which might have `worked' in a previous -version, is now rejected. You should update your code to be C++.</p> - -<p>You should try to use the latest stable release of the GNU C++ -compiler.</p> - -<h3><a name="updating">Common problems updating from G++ 2.95 to G++ -3.0</a></h3> - -<p>G++ 3.0 conforms much closer to the ISO C++ standard (available at -<a href="http://www.ncits.org/cplusplus.htm">http://www.ncits.org/cplusplus.htm</a>).</p> - -<p>We have also implemented some of the core and library defect reports -(available at -<a href="http://anubis.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_defects.html">http://anubis.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_defects.html</a> -& -<a href="http://anubis.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html"> -http://anubis.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html</a> -respectively).</p> - -<ul> - -<li>The ABI has changed. This means that both class layout and name -mangling is different. You <em>must</em> recompile all c++ libraries (if -you don't you will get link errors).</li> - -<li>The standard library is much more conformant, and uses the -<code>std::</code> namespace.</li> - -<li><code>std::</code> is now a real namespace, not an alias for -<code>::</code>.</li> - -<li>The standard header files for the c library don't end with -<code>.h</code>, but begin with <code>c</code> (i.e. -<code><cstdlib></code> rather than <code><stdlib.h></code>). -The <code>.h</code> names are still available, but are deprecated.</li> - -<li><code><strstream></code> is deprecated, use -<code><sstream></code> instead.</li> - -<li><code>streambuf::seekoff</code> & -<code>streambuf::seekpos</code> are private, instead use -<code>streambuf::pubseekoff</code> & -<code>streambuf::pubseekpos</code> respectively.</li> - -<li>If <code>std::operator << (std::ostream &, long long)</code> -doesn't exist, you need to recompile libstdc++ with -<code>--enable-long-long</code>.</li> - -</ul> - -This means you may get lots of errors about things like -<code>strcmp</code> not being found. You've most likely forgotton to -tell the compiler to look in the <code>std::</code> namespace. There are -several ways to do this, - -<ul> - -<li>Say, <code>std::strcmp</code> at the call. This is the most explicit -way of saying what you mean.</li> - -<li>Say, <code>using std::strcmp;</code> somewhere before the call. You -will need to do this for each function or type you wish to use from the -standard library.</li> - -<li>Say, <code>using namespace std;</code> somewhere before the call. -This is the quick-but-dirty fix. This brings the <em>whole</em> of the -<code>std::</code> namespace into scope. <em>Never</em> do this in a -header file, as you will be forcing users of your header file to do the -same.</li> - -</ul> - -<h3><a name="abi">ABI bugs</a></h3> - -<p>3.0 had a new ABI, which affected class layout, function mangling and -calling conventions. We had intended it to be complete, unfortunately -some issues came to light, too late to fix in the 3.0 series. -The ABI should not change in dot releases, so we addressed most issues -in GCC 3.1. -</p> - -<dl> - -<dt>Covariant return types</dt> - -<dd>We do not implement non-trivial covariant returns. We also generate -incorrect virtual function tables for trivial covariance. Although -trivial covariance will work, it is incompatible with the ABI. GNATS PR -3706 tracks this problem.</dd> - -</dl> - -<h3><a name="nonbugs">Non-bugs</a></h3> - -<p>Here are some features that have been reported as bugs, but are -not.</p> - -<dl> - -<dt>Nested classes can access private types of the containing -class.</dt> -<dd><p>G++ now implements type access control on member types. Defect -report 45 clarifies that nested classes are members of the class they -are nested in, and so are granted access to private members of that -class.</p></dd> - -<dt>Classes in exception specifiers must be complete types.</dt> -<dd><p>[15.4]/1 tells you that you cannot have an incomplete type, or -pointer to incomplete (other than <code><i>cv</i> void *</code>) in -an exception specification.</p></dd> - -<dt>G++ emits two copies of constructors and destructors.</dt> - -<dd><p>In general there are <em>three</em> types of constructors (and -destructors).</p> -<ol> -<li>The complete object constructor/destructor.</li> -<li>The base object constructor/destructor.</li> -<li>The allocating destructor/deallocating destructor.</li> -</ol> -<p>The first two are different, when virtual base classes are involved. -In some cases we can do better, and this is logged in GNATS.</p></dd> - -<dt>Exceptions don't work in multithreaded applications.</dt> - -<dd><p>You need to rebuild g++ and libstdc++ with -<code>--enable-threads</code>. Remember, c++ exceptions are not like -hardware interrupts. You cannot throw an exception in one thread and -catch it in another. You cannot throw an exception from a signal -handler, and catch it in the main thread.</p></dd> - -<dt>Global destructors are not run in the correct order.</dt> - -<dd><p>Global destructors should be run in the reverse order of their -constructors <em>completing</em>. In most cases this is the same as -the reverse order of constructors <em>starting</em>, but sometimes it -is different, and that is important. You need to compile and link your -programs with <code>--use-cxa-atexit</code>. We have not turned this -switch on by default, as it requires a <code>cxa</code> aware runtime -library (<code>libc</code>, <code>glibc</code>, or -equivalent).</p></dd> - -<dt>Problems with floating point computations.</dt> -<dd><p>In a number of cases, GCC appears to perform floating point -computations incorrectly. For example, the program</p> -<blockquote><code> -#include <iostream><br /> -<br /> -int main() {<br /> -<br /> - double min = 0.0;<br /> - double max = 0.5;<br /> - double width = 0.01;<br /> - std::cout << (int)(((max - min) / width) - 1) << - std::endl;<br /> -<br /> -}<br /> -</code></blockquote> -<p>might print 50 on some systems and optimization levels, and 51 on -others.</p> - -<p>The is the result of <em>rounding</em>: The computer cannot -represent all real numbers exactly, so it has to use -approximations. When computing with approximation, the computer needs -to round to the nearest representable number.</p> - -<p>This is not a bug in the compiler, but an inherent limitation of -the float and double types. Please study -<a href="http://www.validlab.com/goldberg/paper.ps">this paper</a> -for more information.</p></dd> - -<dt>Templates, scoping, and digraphs.</dt> - -<dd><p>If you have a class in global namespace, say named -<code>X</code>, and want to give it as a template argument to some -other class, say <code>std::vector</code>, then this here fails with a -parser error: <code>std::vector<::X></code>. -</p> - -<p> -The reason is that the standard mandates that the sequence -<code><:</code> is treated as if it were the token -<code>[</code>, and the parser then reports a parse error before the -character <code>:</code> (by which it means the second -colon). There are several such combinations of characters, and -they are called <em>digraphs</em>. -</p> - -<p> -The simplest way to avoid this is to write <code>std::vector< -::X></code>, i.e. place a space between the opening angle bracket -and the scope operator. -</p></dd> - - -</dl> - -<h3><a name="missing">Missing features</a></h3> -<p>We know some things are missing from G++.</p> - -<dl> - -<dt>The <code>export</code> keyword is not implemented.</dt> -<dd><p>Most C++ compilers (G++ included) do not yet implement -<code>export</code>, which is necessary for separate compilation of -template declarations and definitions. Without <code>export</code>, a -template definition must be in scope to be used. The obvious -workaround is simply to place all definitions in the header -itself. Alternatively, the compilation unit containing template -definitions may be included from the header.</p></dd> - -<dt>Two stage lookup in templates is not implemented.</dt> -<dd><p>[14.6] specifies how names are looked up inside a template. G++ -does not do this correctly, but for most templates this will not be -noticeable.</p></dd> - -</dl> - -<h3><a name="parsing">Parse errors for "simple" code</a></h3> - -Up to and including GCC 3.0, the compiler will give "parse error" for -seemingly simple code, such as - -<pre> -struct A{ - A(); - A(int); - void func(); -}; - -struct B{ - B(A); - B(A,A); - void func(); -}; - -void foo(){ - B b(A(),A(1)); //Variable b, initialized with two temporaries - B(A(2)).func(); //B temporary, initialized with A temporary -} -</pre> -The problem is that GCC starts to parse the declaration of -<code>b</code> as a function <code>b</code> returning <code>B</code>, -taking a function returning <code>A</code> as an argument. When it -sees the 1, it is too late. The work-around in these cases is to add -additional parentheses around the expressions that are mistaken as -declarations: -<pre> - (B(A(2))).func(); -</pre> -Sometimes, even that is not enough; to show the compiler that this -should be really an expression, a comma operator with a dummy argument -can be used: -<pre> - B b((0,A()),A(1)); -</pre> -<p> -Another example is the parse error for the <code>return</code> -statement in</p> -<pre> -struct A{}; - -struct B{ - A a; - A f1(bool); -}; - -A B::f1(bool b) -{ - if (b) - return (A()); - return a; -} -</pre> -<p>The problem is that the compiler interprets <code>A()</code> as a -function (taking no arguments, returning <code>A</code>), and -<code>(A()</code>) as a cast - with a missing expression, hence the -parse error. The work-around is to omit the parentheses:</p> -<pre> - if (b) - return A(); -</pre> -<p>This problem occurs in a number of variants; in <code>throw</code> -statements, people also frequently put the object in parentheses. The -exact error also somewhat varies with the compiler version. The -work-arounds proposed do not change the semantics of the program at -all; they make them perhaps less readable.</p> - -<h3><a name="-O3">Optimization at <code>-O3</code> takes a -very long time</a></h3> -<p>At <code>-O3</code>, all functions are candidates for inlining. The -heuristic used has some deficiencies which show up when allowed such -freedom. This is g++ specific, as it has an earlier inliner than -gcc.</p> - -</body> -</html> |