On Dec 8, 2007 10:43 AM, Julian Seward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It's because ISO C says that overflow of signed arithmetic produces > undefined results, and recent gccs exploit that fact for optimisation > purposes. Note that overflow of unsigned arithmetic is still well > defined. If this is the problem then presumably another fix is to > use unsigned subtraction in fast_cmp. > > An interesting first experiment would be to build the unmodified sources > with and without -fno-strict-overflow and see if that changes the outcome.
I'm using gcc 4.1.2 which doesn't have that option, and presumably not the overflow semantics issues that it is related to. Tom -- Tom Hughes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.compton.nu/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php _______________________________________________ Valgrind-developers mailing list Valgrind-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/valgrind-developers
