Mei
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Typo or intended?
Bingfeng Mei wrote:
Hello,
I just updated our porting to include last 2-3 weeks of GCC
developments. I noticed a large number of test failures at
-O1 that use a user-defined data type (based on a special
register file of our
optimizing levels. If I
change it to (optimize 1), everthing is fine as before. I start to wonder
whether (optimize = 1) is a typo or intended. Thanks in advance.
Sorry for the delay with the answer. I was on vacation last week.
As Andrew Haley guess, it was intended. I thought that improving
levels. If I change it to
(optimize 1), everthing is fine as before. I start to wonder
whether (optimize = 1) is a typo or intended. Thanks in advance.
-O1 is supposed to allow debugging but still optimize, so it's quite
possible that Vlad did intend to do this.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
change it to (optimize 1),
everthing is fine as before. I start to wonder whether (optimize = 1) is a
typo or intended. Thanks in advance.
Cheers,
Bingfeng Mei
Broadcom UK
if ((! flag_caller_saves ALLOCNO_CALLS_CROSSED_NUM (a) != 0)
/* For debugging purposes don't put user defined
