This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Miscompilation of remainder expressions


On Wed, 17 Jan 2007, Andrew Haley wrote:

| Gabriel Dos Reis writes:
|  > On Wed, 17 Jan 2007, Andrew Haley wrote:
|  >
|  > [...]
|  >
|  > |  > | "To a man with a hammer, all things look like a nail."  It's very
|  > |  > | tempting for us in gcc-land always to fix things in gcc, not because
|  > |  > | it's technically the right place but because it's what we control
|  > |  > | ourselves.
|  > |  >
|  > |  > well, I'm unclear what your point is here, but certainly GCC is
|  > |  > at fault for generating trapping instructions.
|  > |  > So, we fix the problem in GCC, not because that is what we control
|  > |  > ourselves, but we we failed to generate proper code.
|  > |
|  > | It's not a matter of whose fault it is; trying to apportion blame
|  > | makes no sense.
|  >
|  > we have a communication problem here.  Nobody is trying to apportion
|  > blame.  However, gcc is the tool that generates trapping instruction.
|  > It is unclear why it would be the responsability of the OS or libc
|  > to fix what GCC has generated in the first place.
|
| That makes no sense either.
|
| It's an engineering problem.  We have a widget that does the wrong
| thing*.  We have several ways to make it do the right thing, only one
| of which has no adverse impact on the existing users of the widget.

You believe there is one solution, except that it does not work for
the supported target.  But, I suppose that does not matter since you
have decided that anything else does not make sense.

-- Gaby


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]