This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Infinite loop in dcraw with current GCC versions
- From: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- To: dcoffin <dcoffin at shell dot cybercom dot net>
- Cc: Manuel LÃpez-IbÃÃez <lopezibanez at gmail dot com>, "gcc-help at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-help at gcc dot gnu dot org>, conchur <conchur at web dot de>, Sven Eckelmann <sven at narfation dot org>, RenÃ Rebe ExactCODE <rene at exactcode dot com>
- Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2015 11:31:02 +0000
- Subject: Re: Infinite loop in dcraw with current GCC versions
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CAESRpQDZs=EZTAj7bO5Dn8d=M8p8MuN7_s__XNatnL2BWgs9wA at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAESRpQBx7V=O-pH5Ckvt=XpJHYyEwCyZGz1HQTByqdKftQC0MQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <20150227190206 dot GA6175 at shell dot cybercom dot net> <CAESRpQCCWVQGeWMByFFiX6MLoA-VxJ3AAp5u99VdOy7h8SsgQg at mail dot gmail dot com> <20150227204552 dot GA8916 at shell dot cybercom dot net> <CAH6eHdSWn5eNtXbQ=VXsevBk5xhTaCmOQg_HWyTN=aDCEyJyWg at mail dot gmail dot com>
On 1 March 2015 at 13:17, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 27 February 2015 at 20:45, dcoffin wrote:
>> Hi Manuel,
>> Yes, I know that cam_xyz would have to be declared
>> differently for *(cam_xyz + (i)*3 + (j)) to work, but it's
>> all the same at the hardware level.
> If you're not going to follow the rules of the C language then maybe
> you should stop writing C and stick to assembler.
It was pointed out to me that my message was unnecessarily blunt, sorry.
What I meant is that modern C definitely has a type system with rules
that must be obeyed, it's not just a glorified assembly language. A C
compiler doesn't accept pointer arithmetic that would work if you did
the same thing in assembly.