Build successful for GCC 3.2.2 on FC4, or backward bootstrap compatibility

2005-12-18 Thread Avi Kivity
I recently had to build gcc 3.2.2 on an FC4 box. This failed using gcc 4.0.2 as the bootstrap compiler since gcc 3.2.2 uses no-longer-accepted extensions. So I built gcc 3.4.5 using 4.0.2, and used that to bootstrap 3.2.2. Now, if it is part of the release criteria that release N-1 must be bu

Re: Warning on C++ catch by value on non primitive types

2005-10-16 Thread Avi Kivity
Kai Henningsen wrote: So what you say is that any decent modern C++ coding guide/list wants to forbid catching the C++ standard exceptions, and anything derived from them? no, only catch by value is problematic, as it can lead to slicing. catch by reference is perfectly fine.

Re: Where does the C standard describe overflow of signed integers?

2005-07-15 Thread Avi Kivity
Paul Schlie wrote: In that case you may want to stick with -O0. There are *lots* of things GCC does that alter undefined cases. How about the undefined behavior when aliasing rules are violated? Would you want to make -fno-strict-aliasing be the only supported setting? - Isn't the purp

Re: tr1::unordered_set bizarre rounding behavior (x86)

2005-07-06 Thread Avi Kivity
On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 15:54 +0300, Michael Veksler wrote: > > most architectures have different bit representations for +0.0 and -0.0, > > yet the two values compare equal. > > > > Yet, their sign bit is observable through things like > assert(a == 0.0); > assert(b == 0.0); > 1/(1/a+ 1/b)

Re: tr1::unordered_set bizarre rounding behavior (x86)

2005-07-06 Thread Avi Kivity
On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 20:05 +0200, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: > Paolo Carlin > It is definitely a good thing to use the full bits of value > representation if we ever want to make all "interesting" bits part of > the hash value. For reasonable or sane representations it suffices to > get your hand on