I think I found a bug in the optimizer...

[Zack Weinberg]

On Mon, Feb 28, 2000 at 12:20:27PM -0500, Mark Grosberg wrote:
> 
> 
> On Mon, 28 Feb 2000, Horst von Brand wrote:
> 
> > > Although, it seems to be CPP, not CC1 that is having fits. This would lead
> > > me to suspect that there is a bug in CPP that glibc is bringing out. 
> > 
> > gcc -E takes a few seconds to generate the 12Mb output on my PC, so it is
> > probably not hanging in preprocessing. AFAIU, CPP is now integrated into
> > the lexical analysis of CC1, so there isn't a clearcut difference anymore.
> 
> I was doing ths on a pretty fast PowerPC system though. And I still do see
> a cpp and a cc1... Is the cpp just a dummy now?

cpp has not yet been integrated with cc1; Horst is mistaken.  We are
using the preprocessor implementation that will eventually be
integrated, but as a standalone executable.

> So is this still considered a GCC bug or is it a GLIBC bug? If it is a
> GLIBC bug, can anybody direct me to where I can submit a bug report?
> 
> Unless GCC is made to deal with intrinsics internally, I would say this is
> more a GLIBC bug. 

There is a long term trend to add more intrinisics, but I'd agree that
this is a glibc bug.  Try <libc-alpha@sourceware.cygnus.com>.

zw