>> FAIL: g++.dg/ipa/pr61160-3.C -std=gnu++98 execution test >> FAIL: g++.dg/ipa/pr61160-3.C -std=gnu++11 execution test >> FAIL: g++.dg/ipa/pr61160-3.C -std=gnu++1y execution test > > Note that these three are really the same.
Are they? What's gnu++98, et al? Some language standard? > Lets see. 5 failures is 0.00248%. The tests are run with 10+ year > old HW on a package released two years ago and is two major versions > out of date. What's the age of the hardware got to do with it? I'd've thought that if there were CPU specific workarounds for instructions that didn't behave properly, those would have been worked out long ago. And, forgive me, I just don't get that last bit--if it worked two years ago, it should work today. It doesn't know there are two new versions. Microsoft is the only one I know who makes software that decides it's too old to work anymore. The i7-900's were introduced Nov 2008. Not yet 8 years old. ;-) > I'll let you draw your own conclusions about whether the failures are > significant. I suppose you'd've made that deal with Shylock for a pound of your flesh? ;-) One malformed instruction can cause a computer to crash. GCC is a black box to me. "C" a "johnny come lately" language. My 2nd Edition of K&R says the first edition was in 1978. I taught myself to program over a decade before that. When I was in college Computer Science Departments were a rarity, what there was might be found in Electrical Engineering. I USED compilers, not built them--well enough it kept me at work in the aerospace industry. Something called the Apollo Project. So, no, I don't presume to know which errors in gcc are signifcant and which are not. And I make no apologies for that. -- Paul Rogers [email protected] Rogers' Second Law: "Everything you do communicates." (I do not personally endorse any additions after this line. TANSTAAFL :-) -- http://www.fastmail.com - Same, same, but different... -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page Do not top post on this list. A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
