This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: Binutils actions? binutils/debug.c miscompiled with 2.95.4 < gcc < 3.0.2 in i386/ia32.
- From: Hans-Peter Nilsson <hans-peter dot nilsson at axis dot com>
- To: nickc at cambridge dot redhat dot com
- Cc: hans-peter dot nilsson at axis dot com, binutils at sources dot redhat dot com, gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org, gwpt1 at cam dot ac dot uk, orjan dot friberg at axis dot com
- Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 15:12:01 +0100
- Subject: Re: Binutils actions? binutils/debug.c miscompiled with 2.95.4 < gcc < 3.0.2 in i386/ia32.
> From: Nick Clifton <nickc@cambridge.redhat.com>
> Date: 19 Dec 2001 10:00:39 +0000
> Personally I would be in favour of disguising a work-around as a
> coding enhancement. For example you might remove the tail recursion in
> favour of a while loop (and cite performance optimisation as a reason
> ;-).
Yeah, I'd like to do something in this direction, similar to
what I did in
<URL:http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/2001-11/msg00274.html>,
but I haven't found such a solution yet; just dummy calls.
Changing the code to a while loop means a rewrite, methinks:
again, the problem is that some older gcc *compile* it as a
while-loop / tail-recursion, while the code isn't. :-)
brgds, H-P