Re: GCC 3.3.1 -O2 problem with sqrt.c

Ian Lance Taylor wrote: Sanjiv Kumar Gupta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: I am using gcc 3.3.1 release as my port, and looks like I have hit a problem with greg. You neglected to mention what target you are using. Ian, the port is for a 32-bit RISC and not complete yet, hence still not cont

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

On Mon, 2005-05-30 at 07:59 +0300, Michael Veksler wrote: > > > > > > Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 30/05/2005 06:41:54: > > > On Sun, 2005-05-29 at 12:50 +0200, Giovanni Bajo wrote: > > > Michael Veksler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > 3. Nontrivial search of GCC Bugzil

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

On Mon, 2005-05-30 at 07:59 +0300, Michael Veksler wrote: > > > > > > Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 30/05/2005 06:41:54: > > > On Sun, 2005-05-29 at 12:50 +0200, Giovanni Bajo wrote: > > > Michael Veksler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > 3. Nontrivial search of GCC Bugzil

question in generating rtl code

in gcc-3.4.1 rtl can be generated when parsing the source program, for example, stmt: compstmt { stmt_count++; $$ = $1; } | expr ';' { stmt_count++; $$ = c_expand_expr_stmt ($1); } while in c_expand_body, rtl can also be generated . what are they respectively

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

On 2005-05-30 00:31:44 -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote: [http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21809] > Compiling the code there with icc gives us: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~> icc icca.c > icca.c(7): warning #1572: floating-point equality and inequality > comparisons are unreliable > assert(a ==

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

On 2005-05-29 23:59:39 -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote: > On Sun, 2005-05-29 at 18:19 +0300, Michael Veksler wrote: > > If more than 50 people report it, independently, as a bug then it > > sure is a bug. > > Which is why it's still open! It isn't (it was marked as INVALID). > The problem with 323 is

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

On 2005-05-29 13:22:55 +0300, Michael Veksler wrote: > Two examples come in mind: > 1. Non conformance of x86 to the standard FP due to >its extra precision. Wrong. The IEEE-754 standard allows extended precision. >This includes different results between -O2 and -O0 even with >-fsave-

Re: Sine and Cosine Accuracy

On 2005-05-29 01:33:43 -0600, Roger Sayle wrote: > I apologise for coming into this argument late. I'll admit that I > haven't even caught up on the entire thread, but an interesting > relevant article that may or may not have already been mentioned is: > > http://web.archive.org/web/200404091447

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

On 2005-05-29 18:19:19 +0300, Michael Veksler wrote: > If more than 50 people report it, independently, as a bug then it > sure is a bug. You might argue whether technically it is a bug, but > from user's perspective it is a bug (and you have over 50 duplicates > as an evidence). As such it has to

Re: GCC and Floating-Point

On 2005-05-29 19:22:57 +0200, Marc Espie wrote: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you write: > > http://csdl.computer.org/dl/mags/co/2005/05/r5091.pdf > > "An Open Question to Developers of Numerical Software", by > > W. Kahan and D. Zuras > > Doesn't look publically accessible from my machine..

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William Beebe) wrote on 29.05.05 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On 29 May 2005 11:37:00 +0200, Kai Henningsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Scott Robert Ladd) wrote on 28.05.05 > > > in In my experience, people don't file Bugzilla reports because it feels > > >

Is it possible to catch overflow in long long multiply ?

Hi, I'm using gcc "long long" type for my calculator. I have to check integer overflow. I'm using sign compare to check overflow, but it doesn't work for 10^16 * 10^4 : 1 * 1 Here you have my code to check overflow : long long produit = a * b; // a,b: long long bool ok;

Re: Sine and Cosine Accuracy

* Georg Bauhaus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050529 20:53]: > By "real circle" I mean a thing that is not obfuscated by the useful > but strange ways in which things are redefined by mathematicians; > cf. Halmos for some humor. Sorry, but sin and cos are mathematical functions. If you want to invent some

Extension: GCC warnings for pure/reentrant functions

Hi all, I've had an idea for additional checking that gcc could do to help programmers - check that functions declared as pure or reentrant are actually pure/reentrant. It appears that the most obvious checking can be done relatively easily. I know that there are other methods to check these ty

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 30/05/2005 06:41:54: > On Sun, 2005-05-29 at 12:50 +0200, Giovanni Bajo wrote: > > Michael Veksler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > 3. Nontrivial search of GCC Bugzilla are, sometimes, > > >extremely slow (over a minute). > > > > 3 could be

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

> > MfG Kai > > OK, then let me explain it to you. The problem with the GCC Bugzilla > reporting system is that it's a system that only other developers can > tolerate, let alone love. You probably feel this way about all Bugzilla's then, since they are all the same except for the really large o

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

On Sun, 2005-05-29 at 00:52 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > On 2005-05-28 17:17:32 +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote: > > At this point, I wonder what is wrong with Bugzilla, that those > > programmers don't fill a proper bug report. If there is a problem with > > GCC, that is so annoying to somebody, I t

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

On Sun, 2005-05-29 at 18:19 +0300, Michael Veksler wrote: > > > > > > "Giovanni Bajo wrote on 29/05/2005 13:54:39: > > > Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Perhaps because GCC developers think that GCC isn't buggy when the > > > processor doesn't do the job for them? (I'm th

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

On Sun, 2005-05-29 at 13:22 +0300, Michael Veksler wrote: > > > > > > Haren Visavadia wrote on 29/05/2005 10:51:00: > > > > You can search Bugzilla as well, so you do not fill in > > duplicate bug report. > > Unfortunately, this is not 100% correct. Recently I have filed several > duplicates,

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

On Sun, 2005-05-29 at 16:37 +1200, Ross Smith wrote: > On Sunday, 29 May 2005 03:17, Uros Bizjak wrote: > > > > There is no problem that Bugzilla is un-intuitive, it is far from > > that. The users don't fill bugreports because they are afraid of > > filling an invalid report or a duplicate. > > I

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

On Sun, 2005-05-29 at 12:50 +0200, Giovanni Bajo wrote: > Michael Veksler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Unfortunately, this is not 100% correct. Recently I have filed several > > duplicates, *after* searching Bugzilla. > > That is not a problem. Bugmasters are there exactly for that. We realiz

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla?

On 5/29/05, Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Setting aside for the moment that GCC is a software package *targetted* at > developers, and hence the above is not necessarily a serious problem, I > agree that the Bugzilla interface isn't exactly my favorite UI. However, > I haven't figured

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla?

R Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Joe Buck wrote: >> [The request to create a login] also helps assure that the bug >> filer is a real person. If Bugzilla provided an anonymous way to >> file Bugzilla reports, we'd probably have spammers filling the bug >> database with ads for penis enlargemen

Re: Sine and Cosine Accuracy

On Sun, May 29, 2005 at 05:52:11PM -0400, Scott Robert Ladd wrote: > (I expect Gabriel dos Rios to respond with something pithy here; please > don't disappoint me!) Funny, I don't expect any message from that signature. Gabriel dos Reis, on the other hand, may have something to say...

Re: Sine and Cosine Accuracy

Marc Espie wrote: > Heck, I can plot trajectories on a sphere that do not follow great circles, > and that extend over 360 degrees in longitude. I don't see why I should be > restricted from doing that. Can you show me a circumstance where sin(x - 2 * pi) and sin(x + 2 * pi) are not equal to sin(

ifcvt.c question

Hi, ifcvt.c has this code in find_if_block(): 2718/* If the THEN block has no successors, conditional execution can still 2719 make a conditional call. Don't do this unless the ELSE block has 2720 only one incoming edge -- the CFG manipulation is too ugly otherwise. 272

Re: Sine and Cosine Accuracy

Marc Espie wrote: > Heck, I can plot trajectories on a sphere that do not follow great circles, > and that extend over 360 degrees in longitude. I don't see why I should be > restricted from doing that. Can you show me a circumstance where sin(x - 2 * pi) and sin(x + 2 * pi) are not equal to sin(

Problem with scan-tree-dump-times in dg.exp

I have a new test case where the dump file ought to have 2 occurrences of the pattern "PREDICATE: p.* ne_expr 0B", so I added /* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "PREDICATE: p.* ne_expr 0B" 2 "vrp" } } */ but I'm getting a dump scan failure on that file. I have manually checked the dump file an

Re: Problem with scan-tree-dump-times in dg.exp

On Mon, 2005-05-30 at 12:32 -0400, Diego Novillo wrote: > I have a new test case where the dump file ought to have 2 > occurrences of the pattern "PREDICATE: p.* ne_expr 0B", so I > added > > /* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "PREDICATE: p.* ne_expr 0B" 2 "vrp" } } > */ > > but I'm getting a

Re: Problem with scan-tree-dump-times in dg.exp

On Mon, May 30, 2005 at 11:03:24AM -0600, Jeffrey A Law wrote: > In this case I'd replace the .* with _5 and see if it matches > properly. If it does, then I'd tighten the wildcard. > Something like p_[0-9]* > Excellent, that worked. I wonder why is dejagnu so fussy about patterns. Thanks. D

Re: Sine and Cosine Accuracy

Marc Espie wrote: > Funny, I don't expect any message from that signature. > > Gabriel dos Reis, on the other hand, may have something to say... A regrettable mistake, brought on by spending too many years in Spanish-speaking areas, where "rio" is river. ..Scott

Re: ifcvt.c question

On Sun, 29 May 2005, Steven Bosscher wrote: > I don't understand what lines 2728 to 2741 are for. Could someone give > an example of when we can have a then_bb that has no successors, but > still ends in something that satisfies simplejump_p()? What kind of > strange indirect jump would that be?

Re: Sine and Cosine Accuracy

Bernhard R. Link wrote: > Breaking things like sin(-x) or sin(x+y) will definitly hurt people, > because it is natural to expect this to work. Where in the name of [insert diety here] did I *ever* say I wanted to break anything? Just because something breaks *your* application doesn't mean I shou

Re: Sine and Cosine Accuracy

Bernhard R. Link wrote: Sorry, but sin and cos are mathematical functions. The mathematical functions sin and cos are mathematical functions in mathematics but almost never in GCC's world, "almost never" in the mathematical sense: They can almost never be computed by programs translated using

Re: Sine and Cosine Accuracy

* Georg Bauhaus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050530 19:34]: > Programmers write calls to functions named "sin" and "cos" for > reaons of getting a result that is near what the mathematical > model (involving the same names sin and cos) would suggest. > Question is, how and when should GCC enable a programm

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla?

William Beebe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Then I would like you to review and contrast GCC Bugzilla > (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla) with at least two others: Mozilla's > (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org) and Redhat's > (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/index.cgi). Mozilla's is a bit > more orga

RE: What is wrong with Bugzilla?

As an occasional user of the Bugzilla database, I don't find it terrible to use, though it would be nice if there were an abbreviated interface that looked for the sorts of queries that users issue the most. These often-occurring queries might be best determined by saving a month's worth of que

Re: Sine and Cosine Accuracy

Bernhard R. Link wrote: naming any range smaller than some [-50pi,100pi] "valid" could really make me crazy... No one is asking for sine to be restricted in this way. Some are asking for the freedom to request this or that kind of sine computation to be generated, because they know that for *t

4.0 regression: missing debug info for global variables in C with -O2

Hello, we've just noticed a quite serious regression in debug info output in GCC 4.0 over previous releases: when building with -funit-at-a-time (which is on by default with -O2), *no* debug info for global variables appears to be emitted at all. The problem appears to be this piece of code in ch

Re: 4.0 regression: missing debug info for global variables in C with -O2

On May 30, 2005, at 2:59 PM, Ulrich Weigand wrote: Hello, we've just noticed a quite serious regression in debug info output in GCC 4.0 over previous releases: when building with -funit-at-a-time (which is on by default with -O2), *no* debug info for global variables appears to be emitted at a

Re: Sine and Cosine Accuracy

Georg Bauhaus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Bernhard R. Link wrote: | | > naming any range smaller than some [-50pi,100pi] "valid" could | > really make me crazy... | | No one is asking for sine to be restricted in this way. Howwever, someone came in lectureing us on: Yes, but within the de

Re: 4.0 regression: missing debug info for global variables in C with -O2

On May 30, 2005, at 3:14 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote: On May 30, 2005, at 2:59 PM, Ulrich Weigand wrote: Hello, we've just noticed a quite serious regression in debug info output in GCC 4.0 over previous releases: when building with -funit-at-a-time (which is on by default with -O2), *no* debug

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

--- Daniel Berlin wrote: > > Let's take a duplicate of 323, 21809 > > > Compiling the code there with icc gives us: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~> icc icca.c > icca.c(7): warning #1572: floating-point equality > and inequality > comparisons are unreliable > assert(a == x); > ^ > > ./[EMAIL P

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

Haren Visavadia wrote: test.c: #include #include volatile float x = 3; int main() { float a = 1 / x; x = a; assert(a == x); printf("a has value of %g \n",a); printf("x has value of %g \n",x); assert((int)a == 0); assert((int)x == 0);

Stickiness of TYPE_MIN_VALUE/TYPE_MAX_VALUE

How sticky are TYPE_MIN_VALUE and TYPE_MAX_VALUE? Is it possible to get rid of their effect using a NOP_EXPR, CONVERT_EXPR or VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR? If this is impossible, the Ada front end should probably stop setting these fields because it assumes that it can use values outside that range:

Re: Stickiness of TYPE_MIN_VALUE/TYPE_MAX_VALUE

How sticky are TYPE_MIN_VALUE and TYPE_MAX_VALUE? Is it possible to get rid of their effect using a NOP_EXPR, CONVERT_EXPR or VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR? I don't really understand either question. Also, as to the second, keep in mind their role in array indexes. If this is impossible, th

Re: Stickiness of TYPE_MIN_VALUE/TYPE_MAX_VALUE

On Mon, May 30, 2005 at 09:59:12PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > How sticky are TYPE_MIN_VALUE and TYPE_MAX_VALUE? Is it possible to > get rid of their effect using a NOP_EXPR, CONVERT_EXPR or > VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR? > > If this is impossible, the Ada front end should probably stop setting > these

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

--- Robert Dewar wrote: > And so? Why would you expect this particular example > to give an assertion error. I would not expect an > assert error here. In unoptimized mode, you > certainly > do not expect it, and in optimized mode, I would > expect the register tracker to know that a and x are > in

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

Haren Visavadia wrote: --- Robert Dewar wrote: I would expect the seem behaviour for both cases. why? You have some inaccurate model of computation, which in the absence of switches, is not guaranteed. Floating-point semantics are indeed tricky. test-case.c cause an assertion failure with

Re: 4.0 regression: missing debug info for global variables in C with -O2

Andrew Pinski wrote: > You can reproduce it using: > static int i; > int main(void) > { >i += 3; >i *= 5; >return 0; > } > > and readelf and looking for the DW_TAG_variable tag. Yes; in fact 'main' is even superfluous. Just compile int var; with -S -O2 -g on gcc 3.4 and 4.0 and

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

--- Robert Dewar wrote: > Haren Visavadia wrote: > > --- Robert Dewar wrote: > > > I would expect the seem behaviour for both cases. > > why? You have some inaccurate model of computation, > which in the absence of switches, is not guaranteed. > Floating-point semantics are indeed tricky. Why ar

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

Vincent Lefevre wrote: On 2005-05-29 18:19:19 +0300, Michael Veksler wrote: If more than 50 people report it, independently, as a bug then it sure is a bug. You might argue whether technically it is a bug, but from user's perspective it is a bug (and you have over 50 duplicates as an evidence)

Re: Stickiness of TYPE_MIN_VALUE/TYPE_MAX_VALUE

* Diego Novillo: >> >> >> Current mainline does not optimize array range checks away (even with >> -ftree-vrp), but I'm not sure if this is just a missed optimization >> opportunity as far as the optimizers are concerne

Re: 4.0 regression: missing debug info for global variables in C with -O2

On Mon, May 30, 2005 at 10:13:19PM +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > Andrew Pinski wrote: > > > You can reproduce it using: > > static int i; > > int main(void) > > { > >i += 3; > >i *= 5; > >return 0; > > } > > > > and readelf and looking for the DW_TAG_variable tag. > > Yes; in fact '

make check on FreeBSD AMD64 5.4Release

Here are the results of a make check on a box running FreeBSD 5.4 AMD64 if you would like feedback. If not needed please disregard this email. http://motoko.deltechlabs.com/Vincent/gcc4.txt Vincent Hoshino

Re: Stickiness of TYPE_MIN_VALUE/TYPE_MAX_VALUE

* Richard Kenner: > How sticky are TYPE_MIN_VALUE and TYPE_MAX_VALUE? Is it possible to > get rid of their effect using a NOP_EXPR, CONVERT_EXPR or > VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR? > > I don't really understand either question. Also, as to the second, > keep in mind their role in array indexes.

configure test for a mmap flag

gfortran uses mmap for its IO if an OS has mmap. If found, mmap is used with the MAP_SHARED flag. On linux (and other OS's) this seems to be okay, but on FreeBSD IO can significantly degrade if a file pre-exists. In some testing I've done, linux's MAP_SHARED appears to be equivalent to FreeBSD's

Re: configure test for a mmap flag

* Steve Kargl: > I need to add a configure test to determine if MAP_NOSYNC is > present. What about "#ifdef MAP_NOSYNC" in the code? Or do you invoke mmap directly from Fortran?

Re: Stickiness of TYPE_MIN_VALUE/TYPE_MAX_VALUE

I'll try to phrase it differently: If you access an object whose bit pattern does not represent a value in the range given by TYPE_MIN_VALUE .. TYPE_MAX_VALUE of the corresponding type, does this result in erroneous execution/undefined behavior? My feeling is yes, it does.

Re: configure test for a mmap flag

On Mon, May 30, 2005 at 11:17:34PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Steve Kargl: > > > I need to add a configure test to determine if MAP_NOSYNC is > > present. > > What about "#ifdef MAP_NOSYNC" in the code? Or do you invoke mmap > directly from Fortran? There are sometimes too many TREEs (pun

successful build of GCC 4.0.0 on Mac OS 10.4.1

gcc-4.0.0 -v Using built-in specs. Target: powerpc-apple-darwin8.1.0 Configured with: ../gcc-4.0.0/configure --program-suffix=-4.0.0 --enable-languages=c,c++,objc,java Thread model: posix gcc version 4.0.0 ./config.guess powerpc-apple-darwin8.1.0 uname -a Darwin Bojan-Antonovics-Computer.loca

Re: Sine and Cosine Accuracy

Scott Robert Ladd wrote: Marc Espie wrote: Heck, I can plot trajectories on a sphere that do not follow great circles, and that extend over 360 degrees in longitude. I don't see why I should be restricted from doing that. Can you show me a circumstance where sin(x - 2 * pi) and sin(x

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

Kai Henningsen wrote: The entire GCC website (of which GCC Bugzilla is a part) could be the poster child for why developers should never be allowed to design user interfaces, especially web user interfaces. I'm sure I'll get flamed for wanting style over substance or about the proliferation of e

RE: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

> > Next try documentation, installation. Talks about compiling again. > Finally, at download, binaries I find what I want. Seeing as I suspect > that is the link most people want when they first visit, it should > perhaps be a little more obvious, and in the main body near the top? Your scen

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

> Lets try to get a copy of gcc. Firstly I see something in the top-left > marked "releases". I click on it. It doesn't mention 4.0, Fair point. This needs fixing. > and despite reasonable attempts I see no sign of code. Huh? The first paragraph on that page is "Source code for GCC releases ma

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

Daniel Berlin wrote: On Sun, 2005-05-29 at 16:37 +1200, Ross Smith wrote: On Sunday, 29 May 2005 03:17, Uros Bizjak wrote: Is perhaps some kind of anonymous account needed (as in Slashdot's case) to encourage these users to fill bugreports? I think this is probably the real showstopper. I'll

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

Haren Visavadia wrote: --- Robert Dewar wrote: Haren Visavadia wrote: --- Robert Dewar wrote: I would expect the seem behaviour for both cases. why? You have some inaccurate model of computation, which in the absence of switches, is not guaranteed. Floating-point semantics are indeed tri

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

Toon Moene wrote: But even this were fixed, many users would still complain. That's why I think that the Linux kernel should set the CPU in double-precision mode, like some other OS's (MS Windows, *BSD) -- but this is off-topic here. It's not off-topic. In fact, Jim Wilson argued this point h

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla?

R Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I just wanted to speak up and say that the idea of alarm bells going off > when people see a request for an email address from bugzilla is probably > one of the sillier things I've read this week. Anyone lucid enough to > be reporting a bug to an open source p

Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla?

Russ Allbery wrote: It's not the request for the e-mail address. It's that it's phrased as a login screen and a button to create an account. I know that I definitely pause and consider before I create an account at a web site. There are many on-line newspapers that I refuse to read articles f

Re: GCC 3.3.1 -O2 problem with sqrt.c

. I don't know whether gcc mail server accepts attachments or not, Oh. It does. --- Ian Lance Taylor wrote: Sanjiv Kumar Gupta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: I am using gcc 3.3.1 release as my port, and looks like I have hit a problem with greg. You neglected to mention what target you