Daniel Jacobowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But the value of J is not required to coordinate with any sequence
points in the implementation, only in the abstract machine...
In the code, there are two modifications to i, namely
i++;
j = 6;
i--;
So at the first sequence
On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 11:26:17PM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote:
I'll leave it to our release manager to decide if this issue warrants
backporting the relevant patches or not.
I think that your point that we will include the generated files on the
branch is a good one; let's not backport the
Your message dated Tue, 15 Oct 2002 19:20:20 +1000
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#164554: gcc-3.2: volatile not respected on alpha
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the
Package: g++-3.2
Version: 1:3.2.1-0pre3
Severity: normal
Tags: upstream
GCC 3.2 appears to define _GNU_SOURCE unconditionally. This is somewhat
unhelpful if one wishes to use the feature selection macros provided by
glibc to choose which APIs are provided by the library.
This appears to be a
On Tue, Oct 15, 2002 at 06:36:50PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
Grovelling around on the GCC website it appears that the issue is that
libstdc++ needs _GNU_SOURCE although I can't quite be sure about that.
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/faq/index.html#3_5
--
I would therefore like
On Tue, Oct 15, 2002 at 02:12:48PM -0400, Phil Edwards wrote:
On Tue, Oct 15, 2002 at 06:36:50PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
Grovelling around on the GCC website it appears that the issue is that
libstdc++ needs _GNU_SOURCE although I can't quite be sure about that.
The following piece of code compiles with gcc-3.0 but not with
gcc-3.2... is this a gcc bug? or is the code broken?
I would say the later.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ gcc-3.2 -c t.c
t.c: In function `foo':
t.c:12: initializer element is not constant
(it's a simplified example of some code from
7 matches
Mail list logo
