Re: About initialization of automatic variables

s just one instance of "undefined value". -- Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org GPG Key fingerprint = 7578 EB47 D4E5 4D69 2510 2552 DF73 E780 A9DA AEC1 "And now for something completely different."

Re: Compilation of rust-demangle.c fails on MinGW

On Aug 04 2021, Eli Zaretskii via Gcc-bugs wrote: > I'd love to, but please tell me where. I couldn't find any > information about reporting libiberty bugs, sorry if I missed > something obvious. The libiberty README says to report bugs to gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org. Andreas. -- Andre

Re: [Bug tree-optimization/65752] Too strong optimizations int - pointer casts

. -- Andreas Schwab, SUSE Labs, sch...@suse.de GPG Key fingerprint = 0196 BAD8 1CE9 1970 F4BE 1748 E4D4 88E3 0EEA B9D7 And now for something completely different.

Re: [Bug libffi/47442] does not build multilib on m68k

joel at gcc dot gnu.org gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org writes: Why cmp.w when it is tst.l? Because it is smaller.

Re: [Bug insn-scheduling][4.4 ARM] Scheduling error on -O2 -mfloat-abi=softfp -mfpu=vfp

M.F. Wu mingfeng6...@gmail.com writes: Source code: typedef unsigned long long float64; float64 syst_float64_div( float64 a, float64 b ) { float64 z; *( (double *) z ) = *( (double *) a ) / *( (double *) b ); Please read http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/#nonbugs_c. Andreas. -- Andreas

Re: size_t cast in libssp

then (size_t)INT_MAX == SIZE_MAX, ie. this is the minimum either way. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, sch...@redhat.com GPG Key fingerprint = D4E8 DBE3 3813 BB5D FA84 5EC7 45C6 250E 6F00 984E And now for something completely different.

Re: gcc cannot recognize 0xe+0x1

Tadahito Kobayashi koval...@gmail.com writes: return 0xe+0x1 ; 0xe+0x1 forms a single preprocessing token (a pp-number), but cannot be converted to a valid token. Add some whitespace around + to break up the preprocessing token. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org Key

Re: misusing placement new OR possible cxx bug

, or is this code wrong and accidentally accepted by gcc? In the former case, please correct me and sorry for the noise! $ gcc -Wunused-value -c new.cc new.cc: In function 'int main(int, char**)': new.cc:4: warning: left-hand operand of comma has no effect Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, [EMAIL

Re: ANSI C, type composition, constant arrays in function arguments

Mikoláš Janota [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: However, the following declarations void p(int p[30]); void p(int p[4]); do not yield a warning. See 6.7.5.3#7. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, [EMAIL PROTECTED] SuSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany PGP key

Re: Suspected bug, triggering code included

of the address of the newly allocated memory. This is not a bug. The evaluation order of the operands is unspecified. When splitting the multiple assignment in two (see #ifdef WORK_AROUND), everything works fine. It's not a workaround, it's the only correct solution. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab

Re: -O2 bug in gcc 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 with 64 bit integers on x86

Anders Torger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: unsigned long hash(void *key) { unsigned long long ull; ull = *(unsigned long long *)key; return ((unsigned long *)ull)[0] ^ ((unsigned long *)ull)[1]; Try -Wstrict-aliasing. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, [EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: -O2 bug in gcc 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 with 64 bit integers on x86

-Options.html#index-fstrict_002daliasing-422 Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, [EMAIL PROTECTED] SuSE Linux AG, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5 And now for something completely different.

Re: -O2 bug in gcc 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 with 64 bit integers on x86

Anders Torger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Perhaps GCC should not accept code that will result in undefined behaviour This is impossible because there is nothing wrong when the code is never executed. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, [EMAIL PROTECTED] SuSE Linux AG, Maxfeldstraße 5