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]

Re: finding strict aliasing problems

To: Toon Moene <toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl>
Subject: Re: finding strict aliasing problems
From: "H . J . Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 23:35:09 -0700
Cc: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>,Joe Buck <jbuck at racerx dot synopsys dot com>,Brad Lucier <lucier at math dot purdue dot edu>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org,feeley at iro dot umontreal dot ca
References: <200105010658.BAA31179@zakon.math.purdue.edu> <200105010743.AAA18017@racerx.synopsys.com> <20010501103832.B1863@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz> <3AF05AA9.B728084E@moene.indiv.nluug.nl>

On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 09:06:17PM +0200, Toon Moene wrote:
> Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> 
> > From my experience (gcc-2.96-RH defaults to strict-aliasing) the vast
> > majority of sources we've been compiling is ok, there were a couple of bugs
> > (like in X11) which have been fixed since then and ATM I'm aware of just 2
> > packages which have not been fixed yet (clapack and one more).
> 
> I must say that - in retrospect - I find this a very courageous move by
> Red Hat.  It might easily have been responsible for 80-90 % of the
> complaints about (the C-side) of the compiler suite at the time Red Hat
> Linux 7.0 was released (in September last year).
> 

I have found that gcc 2.96 from RedHat 7.x is the most stable and
capable version of gcc I have ever used.


H.J.

References:
- finding strict aliasing problems
  - From: Brad Lucier
- Re: finding strict aliasing problems
  - From: Joe Buck
- Re: finding strict aliasing problems
  - From: Jakub Jelinek
- Re: finding strict aliasing problems
  - From: Toon Moene

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