This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: gcc3.1 regression?
- From: Jimen Ching <jching at flex dot com>
- To: <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 12:02:57 -1000 (HST)
- Subject: Re: gcc3.1 regression?
On Thu, 9 May 2002, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>On Wed, May 08, 2002 at 11:05:16PM -1000, Jimen Ching wrote:
>> The code below seems to be incorrectly compiled by gcc3.1 cvs that I
>> bootstraped on Debian2.2 (Linux kernel 2.2.17).
>Can you please file a GNATS PR about this?
Ok, it is PR/6613. I used my original sample source code, since I have no
idea what your test case does. Hope that is ok. I wanted to add a link
to this thread, but I didn't know how to do that.
>The problem is (again) RTX_UNCHANGING_P, looking forward to its final
>death in 3.2
Does this mean that the 3.1 release will not have a fix?
Debian/GNU-Linux 2.2 still uses 2.95.2, and it works with that version.
So I would assume this is a regression. Though removing the copy
constructor or using an integer member data is a work-around, neither are
acceptable in the application I am developing. I can remove the -O2, but
the application is already slow. It would be really disappointing if 3.1
can not correctly build my app with optimization enabled.
Jimen Ching (WH6BRR) firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com