From owner-freebsd-current Fri Dec 8 10:42:21 2000 From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 8 10:42:19 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from hcarp00g.ca.nortel.com (unknown [47.248.133.243]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1322A37B401; Fri, 8 Dec 2000 10:42:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from hcarp00g.ca.nortel.com (hcarp00g.ca.nortel.com [47.196.31.114]) by hcarp00g.ca.nortel.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eB8HhX875995; Fri, 8 Dec 2000 12:43:35 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from atrens@nortel.ca) Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2000 12:43:33 -0500 (EST) From: X-Sender: Reply-To: To: John Baldwin Cc: "Atrens, Andrew [SKY:ET95:EXCH]" , Subject: RE: possibly related data point - (was) Re: Current Broken! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG I hit on it by accident (I normally compile with -O). That said, your claim that gcc with no optimization generates incorrect code is kind of counter-intuitive, wouldn't you say ? I think you missed my point, I was just illustrating that optimizer seems to affect (in my case apparently negate) the processing of constraints. What you take from that is up to you - I was just trying to be helpful :) Cheers, A. +-- | Andrew Atrens Nortel Networks, Ottawa, Canada. | | All opinions expressed are my own, not those of any employer. | --+ Berkeley had what we called "copycenter", which is "take it down to the copy center and make as many copies as you want". -- Kirk McKusick +-- --+ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message