From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Christopher Cramer Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: bug in throw.c Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 01:31:06 -0500 Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <20030408013106.A8696@kiwi.pyrotechnics.com> References: <20030407000136.0F81D8B7@panda.mostang.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1049783332 25198 80.91.224.249 (8 Apr 2003 06:28:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 06:28:52 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Apr 08 08:28:50 2003 Return-path: Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 192mbC-0006YI-00 for ; Tue, 08 Apr 2003 08:28:50 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 192mb2-0000Nj-08 for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 08 Apr 2003 02:28:40 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 192mal-0000Kq-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Apr 2003 02:28:23 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 192maj-0000Ji-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Apr 2003 02:28:22 -0400 Original-Received: from pyro.net ([207.7.10.6] helo=kiwi.pyro.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 192maj-0000G6-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Apr 2003 02:28:21 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail 15549 invoked by uid 8610); 8 Apr 2003 06:31:07 -0000 Original-To: David.Mosberger@acm.org Mail-Followup-To: David.Mosberger@acm.org, guile-devel@gnu.org Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20030407000136.0F81D8B7@panda.mostang.com>; from davidm@mostang.com on Sun, Apr 06, 2003 at 05:01:36PM -0700 X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b5 Precedence: list List-Id: Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:2146 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel:2146 On Sun, Apr 06, 2003 at 05:01:36PM -0700, David Mosberger-Tang wrote: > #if 0/*def __GNUC__*/ > /* Dirk:FIXME:: This bugfix should be removed some time. */ > /* GCC 2.95.2 has a bug in its optimizer that makes it generate > incorrect code sometimes. This barrier stops it from being too > clever. */ > asm volatile ("" : "=g" (winds)); > #endif > > This is clearly bogus: the asm statement claims that it's writing the > "winds" variable, which isn't true. On ia64, this has the effect that > the "winds" gets corrupted and comes out with value "1". Just Now, I haven't checked up on the changes in recent GCC versions, but that behavior seems really odd to me. How does it change the value of a variable if you put in an empty asm statement that only claims to change the variable? This is a common tactic to defeat the optimizer. I don't understand why GCC would suddenly have problems with this. -- Christopher Cramer "People said it couldn't be that our soldiers would do such things. Now you read worse things in the mainstream media and people don't care. We used to say that if only people know about it, it would stop. Now they know about it, and it hasn't stopped." - Adam Keller _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel