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: old intentional gcc bug?


Dave Korn wrote:
On 23 June 2007 22:53, Brooks Moses wrote:
Indeed.  It would be interesting to confirm whether or not a copy of gcc
bootstrapped with a non-gcc compiler matched byte-for-byte with a copy
of gcc bootstrapped from gcc.  Not so much to look for intentional
things like this, but to see whether the bootstrapping actually does
achieve its goal of obtaining a result that's independent of the
bootstrapping compiler.  Has anyone actually tried it?

That's kinda the whole point of bootstrapping :) any variation is in the stage1 compiler only, modulo such bad bugs in the native compiler that the stage1 gcc miscompiles stage2 gcc.

Right, exactly. I'm an engineer; you give me a theory like that, and I become curious how much it's been tested in practice. :)


- Brooks


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