Re: [Flightgear-devel] Nasal vs. gcc 4.0.x

2005-08-13 Thread Mathias Fröhlich
On Donnerstag 11 August 2005 10:09, Erik Hofman wrote: Mathias Fröhlich wrote: I have sometimes strange problems with some keybindings. I do not know if these are dony by nasal or if the ones in question are implementented directly. But sounds like that. I expect so. About every key I

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Nasal vs. gcc 4.0.x

2005-08-13 Thread Erik Hofman
Mathias Fröhlich wrote: You use gcc-4.* on your O2? No the O2 is big-endian, different problem. I thought that you use sgi's CC? Yes. Erik ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Nasal vs. gcc 4.0.x

2005-08-11 Thread Erik Hofman
Andy Ross wrote: * Yes, I'm using Nasal at work. We even have a mac here that has reproduced the endianness issues, so hopefully I'll have a fix for that ready in a few days. Yes! ;-) Seriously, it's probably a *lot* faster to hunt down the problem in a stand-alone version of Nasal.

[Flightgear-devel] Nasal vs. gcc 4.0.x

2005-08-10 Thread Andy Ross
Just in case anyone else has noticed: I discovered today at work* that the gcc 4.0.1 shipped with Fedora Core 4 miscompiles Nasal pretty badly when the optimizer is turned on. I'm not sure what the effect will be on FlightGear specifically, as I haven't had time to do a build recently.