| From: Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | On Sat, 2005-07-16 at 21:36 -0400, D. Hugh Redelmeier wrote: | > | From: Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | > | > | After many exchanges via private mails and | > | looking at the various reports related to this issue, it has become | > | clear to me that the interpretations offered to justify why GCC is | > | behaving the way it does seem to go beyond what can be inferred. | > | > OK. | > | > Is there a consensus on this? If not, how can a consensus be reached? | > | I'll pass on this, since I've said my piece, and i don't care about | volatile much.
I would very much like you to restate your objections with careful reference to the C Standard. I really want the correct analysis more than I want my analysis. | However, if you come after const or restrict I'll bite | back. What exactly do you think const says that you can find useful for optimization? I don't think that it is helpful (except on actual definitions). But I haven't looked closely at this issue. | Personally, I think a DR should be filed to clarify this, instead of all | this argument and opinion. I would like you to explain where you think that the current standard is ambiguous on this matter. Without ambiguity or error, a DR is not appropriate. | > If so, how can we get a fix? | Usually by asking nicely and pressuring people. | Or waiting long enough for someone to get around to it. | Or paying someone to fix it :) Those are good answers. | > I think that is urgent. | No offense, but everyone thinks the problems that affect them are the | most urgent. Yeah. I've given a few arguments for urgency. | > This bug is causing X to misbehave and the | > current workarounds might be harmful. Who knows what other | > manifestations might be lurking? | | Whoever is testing distributions compiled with mainline :) Testing can show the presence of bugs but not their absence. But you knew that. | > As I said, I'm not a GCC hacker. Who is the likely maintainer to fix | > this? | Anyone can fix it, however, who can review the fix depends on what it | touches. | | > Does he or she agree that this needs to be done? | > Urgently? | | This is actually probably pretty unlikely. There are few bugs most | people consider urgent, and i'd venture this is not one of them. It | would probably be fixed by release time. | | In that spirit, here is a patch against mainline that fixes your bug (a | similar patch to the same function should work on 4.0) Thanks! | Someone else can go through the process of testing and getting this | reviewed, i'm currently swamped (IE i have no plans to try to submit | this to gcc-patches).
