--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-23 06:29 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.3.
Thanks for the report
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-23 06:28 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.3.
Thanks for the report
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #21 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-23 06:28 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.3.
Thanks for the report
Paul
PS The original problem was not present in 4.3 but the reduced version was.
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #20 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-23 06:27 ---
Subject: Bug 37274
Author: pault
Date: Tue Sep 23 06:25:39 2008
New Revision: 140578
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=140578
Log:
2008-09-23 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-23 06:27 ---
Subject: Bug 36454
Author: pault
Date: Tue Sep 23 06:25:39 2008
New Revision: 140578
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=140578
Log:
2008-09-23 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran/
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-23 06:27 ---
Subject: Bug 36374
Author: pault
Date: Tue Sep 23 06:25:39 2008
New Revision: 140578
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=140578
Log:
2008-09-23 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran/
--- Comment #17 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-23 06:26
---
I was doing some additional testing after the above patch and see that it
breaks other things w.r.t 4.3 ABI. An example is namelist_14.f90 which fails
with a 4.3 executable and 4.4 library. I am keeping this PR
--- Comment #1 from linuxl4 at sohu dot com 2008-09-23 05:06 ---
can anybody comfirm it?
I built gcc ppl polylib cloog mpfr gmp with CFLAGS="-pipe -O3 -ftree-vectorize
-march=pentium4 -mfpmath=sse"
glibc and binutils are of my gentoo 2008.0 hosts'
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
--- Comment #16 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-23 03:53
---
Subject: Bug 37498
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Tue Sep 23 03:52:19 2008
New Revision: 140576
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=140576
Log:
2008-09-22 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Comment #5 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2008-09-23 00:49
---
Fixed for 4.4.0.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-23 00:47 ---
Subject: Bug 32422
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Sep 23 00:47:02 2008
New Revision: 140574
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=140574
Log:
2008-09-23 Paolo Carlini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR libstd
--- Comment #17 from daney at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 23:56 ---
For me the testcase always gets a ConcurrentModificationException in w.clear()
very soon after starting. This is on GCC trunk 140563 on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
If I synchronize(w) for accesses to w there is no
Concurre
--- Comment #10 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 23:08 ---
The new testcase passes with "-O1 -funsafe-math-optimizations
-fno-tree-dominator-opts". The dom1 dump for "-O1 -funsafe-math-optimizations"
twice reports "Invalid sum of incoming frequencies".
--
http://gcc.gnu
--- Comment #13 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 22:46 ---
Subject: Bug 37535
Author: hjl
Date: Mon Sep 22 22:44:53 2008
New Revision: 140568
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=140568
Log:
2008-09-22 Vladimir Makarov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR middle
--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 22:45 ---
The one thing I noticed is that fsel is used in the -ffast-math case and it
does a subtraction.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37449
--- Comment #8 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 22:12 ---
Created an attachment (id=16382)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16382&action=view)
small C testcase that fails with current trunk
This version of the small C testcase fails with current mainline w
--- Comment #40 from pluto at agmk dot net 2008-09-22 21:54 ---
(In reply to comment #39)
> Created an attachment (id=16380)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16380&action=view) [edit]
> Updated fixed
>
1). still there is a warning:
../../gcc/cp/error.c: In function
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.0
Version|lto |4.4.0
http://
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 21:09 ---
Reduced even further and will reproduce with both LP32 and LP64 targets (as
long as float is 32bits and double is 64bits):
typedef union
{
char *string;
double dval;
float fval;
} yystype;
char *f(void)
{
yys
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 21:00 ---
This worked with:
gcc version 4.4.0 20080917 (experimental) [trunk revision 140434] (GCC)
But fails with:
GNU C (GCC) version 4.4.0 20080922 (experimental) [trunk revision 140563]
(i386-apple-darwin8.11.1)
The
--- Comment #4 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 20:57 ---
Subject: Bug 37391
Author: bkoz
Date: Mon Sep 22 20:56:08 2008
New Revision: 140564
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=140564
Log:
2008-09-22 Benjamin Kosnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR libstd
--- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 20:56 ---
Should be fixed now.
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|
--- Comment #5 from john dot spelis at 3dlabs dot com 2008-09-22 20:40
---
Subject: Re: Pointer arithmetic yields strange result
Apologies; never realised that pointer arithmetic was defined
in that fashion (i.e. must always be a multiple of the object size).
Sorry to have bothered y
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Summary|gcc 4.4 regression: ICE on |[4.
--- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 20:22 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Created an attachment (id=16381)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16381&action=view) [edit]
> Although this test case compiles without error, it gives the wrong output:
I
--- Comment #1 from edwintorok at gmail dot com 2008-09-22 20:18 ---
/* testcase compile this with -O1 */
typedef struct TCase TCase;
typedef void (*TFun) (int);
typedef struct Suite Suite;
void _tcase_add_test (TCase * tc, TFun tf, const char *fname, int signal,
in
ltilib
--disable-bootstrap --disable-static --prefix=/home/edwin/gcc_inst/
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.4.0 20080922 (experimental) (GCC)
$ x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu-gcc-4.4.0 -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc/configure --enable-languages=c --disable-mu
--- Comment #16 from daney at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 20:08 ---
This is biting me now. Perhaps I may look at fixing it (or maybe not...).
--
daney at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 19:57 ---
Can you try this again?
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
S
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 19:55 ---
Is && part of GNU C++98 now?
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 19:54 ---
This is invalid code as the difference between ((EDIDDetailed *)
&pExt->checksum) - pDTD is 88 which is not a multiple of 18. This happens the
same way on powerpc.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #4 from daney at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 19:52 ---
Fix committed.
--
daney at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIG
--- Comment #3 from daney at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 19:49 ---
Subject: Bug 37593
Author: daney
Date: Mon Sep 22 19:48:09 2008
New Revision: 140563
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=140563
Log:
2008-09-22 David Daney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR target/3
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Component|c |bootstrap
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 19:44 ---
Also related to PR 36690.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37616
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 19:39 ---
Related to PR 29609.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37616
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37537
ate_expression): Do not
recursively generate expressions if running FRE.
* gcc.c-torture/compile/20080922-1.c: New testcase.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-fre-7.c: Remove XFAIL.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-fre-8.c: Likewise.
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-fre-9.c: Likewise.
Added:
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 19:17 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #2 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 19:06 ---
All the test and example links in pb_ds that point to source files are broken.
These include links linked to from these pages:
libstdc++-v3/doc/html/ext/pb_ds/assoc_examples.html
libstdc++-v3/doc/html/ext/pb_ds/pq_exa
--- Comment #3 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2008-09-22 17:25
---
I'm fixing this, together with DR 23.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Lines with 'break', 'goto', and 'continue' are not available for
debugging.
On GCC compilers, one can not set a breakpoint on lines with 'goto', 'break',
or
'continue' statements. This is incorrect, since these lines contain
user statements. Also, for example IBM XLC compilers on AIX 6.1 have
thes
--- Comment #1 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 16:50 ---
Created an attachment (id=16381)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16381&action=view)
patch
The attached patch is as far as I got with this up to now. It regtests fine and
makes the following modifie
--- Comment #6 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 16:43 ---
Then, try to raise the issue in GCC and outline a clear plan. Otherwise, I
assure you this is going to stay as-is for the next 5-10 years because nobody
has a clear idea on how to tackle this in a way that pleases a maj
--- Comment #8 from sje at cup dot hp dot com 2008-09-22 16:35 ---
I'll try to review the IA64 sel-sched patch over the next couple of weeks. I
can't approve the workaround since it is not IA64 specific (it is in
haifa-sched.c).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37381
Dear Nrao Email Account User,
We wrote to you on 29 july 2008 advising that you change the
password on your account in order to prevent any unauthorised
account access following the network instruction we previously
communicated.
All Mailhub systems will undergo regularly scheduled maintenance.
A
--- Comment #5 from zackw at panix dot com 2008-09-22 15:46 ---
I'm not monitoring consensus of developers anymore, but I think we *should*
either move these warnings to the middle end or do some CCP/VRP in the front
ends. The -Wuninitialized warnings are a lot less trouble than the
sig
--- Comment #6 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2008-09-22 15:32
---
Tom, could you elaborate why x1 and x2 should be printed differently?
I do not say they should not but I do not see a clear reason for either way.
Should we also try to record the source name of this variable
--- Comment #5 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 15:19 ---
No, I think we have to record what the user actually wrote.
For instance, consider:
#include
using namespace std;
std::string x1;
string x2;
If we record the fully qualified name, we can't distinguish these two ca
--- Comment #30 from dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 15:17 ---
Subject: Bug 33642
Author: dje
Date: Mon Sep 22 15:15:56 2008
New Revision: 140551
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=140551
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/33642
* gcc.c-torture/compile/pr
--- Comment #39 from b0ntrict0r at yandex dot ru 2008-09-22 15:12 ---
Created an attachment (id=16380)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16380&action=view)
Updated fixed
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14912
--- Comment #6 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2008-09-22
14:11 ---
Subject: Re: [4.4 Regression] libgcc2.c:1981: ICE:
vector VEC(m em_ref_p,base) index domain error, in
create_vop_ref_mapping_loop at tree-ssa-lo op-im.c:1519
Attached .i.
Dave
--- Co
--- Comment #54 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2008-09-22 14:08
---
(In reply to comment #52)
> It seems the library maintainers are not willing to see this problem.
> Asking for a new C++ frontend feature as an excuse to not fix the
> library problem is very lame IMHO.
For t
--- Comment #2 from daniel dot diaz at univ-paris1 dot fr 2008-09-22 14:08
---
Richard Guenther says it is impossible in C... In C maybe but not in GNU C :-)
This worked perfectly under older versions (may gcc 3.x.x) and it is a pitty if
this feature is lost now.
--
http://gcc.gnu
--- Comment #1 from sposelenov at emcraft dot com 2008-09-22 13:32 ---
Created an attachment (id=16378)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16378&action=view)
Reduced testcase
Build as:
arm-linux-gnueabi-g++ -o cond1 cond1.C
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.c
--- Comment #4 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 13:28 ---
I don't understand why this is not closed as wontfix. These warnings are coming
from the front-end.
Unless we do one of the following:
a) some CCP and VRP in the FE, or
b) move the warnings to the middle-end,
this c
Follow up to PR 37486.
see also http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2008-09/msg00366.html
The following program should print "5" but it prints "0" with default options
in gfortran. The problem is that in the program, the common object is padded as
<4bytes padding> + i + r8
and then in the subroutine,
Ran gcc testsuite and got a lot of c++ testsuite failures like for
g++.dg/eh/cond1.C:
...
terminate called after throwing an instance of 'int'
terminate called recursively
...
Compiler details:
Target: arm-linux-gnueabi
Configured with:
/work/psl/eldk-builds/arm-2008-09-10/work/usr/src/denx/BUILD/
--- Comment #53 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 12:41
---
CCing C++ FE maintainers.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #20 from irar at il dot ibm dot com 2008-09-22 12:41 ---
(In reply to comment #18)
> Created an attachment (id=16377)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16377&action=view) [edit]
> patch
>
> Actually this one vectorizes slp-perm-1.c for me on a ppc64 cross.
--- Comment #52 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 12:40
---
Can we please have
"1) -fno-exceptions
This flag turns off C++ exception handling support, which is indicated at
compile time by __GXX_EXCEPTIONS being undefined. Use of the keywords try,
catch, or throw produces
--- Comment #19 from irar at il dot ibm dot com 2008-09-22 12:32 ---
(In reply to comment #18)
> Created an attachment (id=16377)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16377&action=view) [edit]
> patch
>
> Actually this one vectorizes slp-perm-1.c for me on a ppc64 cross.
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 12:22 ---
All XFAILs left are due to the SCCVN union value-numbering optimization being
disabled:
#if FIXME
/* If this is a reference to a union member, record the union
member size as operand. Do so o
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 12:20 ---
Current PRE simplifies only a subset of previous PRE - see
tree-ssa-pre.c:fully_constant_expression.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37542
--- Comment #5 from tim at klingt dot org 2008-09-22 12:11 ---
i have the same issue with both gcc-4.3 and gcc-4.4 ...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34624
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 11:54 ---
Subject: Bug 37145
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Sep 22 11:53:29 2008
New Revision: 140547
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=140547
Log:
2008-09-22 Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 11:54 ---
Technically gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-fre-10.c also fails (or rather it doesn't
properly test for what it is supposed to).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37145
--- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 11:50 ---
Fixed with r140546. Closing.
--
janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #18 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 11:48
---
Created an attachment (id=16377)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16377&action=view)
patch
Actually this one vectorizes slp-perm-1.c for me on a ppc64 cross. It also
passes the x86_64 vect test
--- Comment #9 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 11:46 ---
Subject: Bug 37486
Author: janus
Date: Mon Sep 22 11:45:02 2008
New Revision: 140546
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=140546
Log:
2008-09-22 Janus Weil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran/3
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 11:27 ---
reg_ebx is obviously unused in your function so the assignment is DCEd. I
guess
what you try to do is not really possible with C.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
in this simple function
bug.c:
void restore() {
register long reg_ebx asm ("ebx");
reg_ebx = saved_ebx;
}
$ gcc -v
Utilisation des specs internes.
Target: i386-redhat-linux
Configuré avec: ../configure --prefix=/usr --mandir=/usr/share/man
--infodir=/usr/share/info --with-bugurl=http://bugzi
--- Comment #1 from brian at dessent dot net 2008-09-22 11:15 ---
Subject: Re: New: libgcc/configure (as script)fail with "line 77
exec : : not found."
The error means you don't have a cross-assembler installed correctly
prior to configuring gcc. gcc is just a compiler, you need
--- Comment #17 from rguenther at suse dot de 2008-09-22 11:14 ---
Subject: Re: [4.4 Regression] Revision 140257 causes
vectorizer tests failures
On Mon, 22 Sep 2008, irar at il dot ibm dot com wrote:
> --- Comment #16 from irar at il dot ibm dot com 2008-09-22 10:33 ---
> (
I get configure error in libgcc/configure.
the new gcc compiler seem build and here, but the script as(attached) does exec
a empty name in line 77 and report exec : : not found.
this happen too when i want compile a program by hand and type
xgcc test.c
where test.c contain this
main()
{
}
so
--- Comment #16 from irar at il dot ibm dot com 2008-09-22 10:33 ---
(In reply to comment #15)
> This is because the original access is through a restricted pointer, so the
> check is conservatively correct at this point. We can move it to the
> point where the vector pointer is created
--- Comment #15 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 10:07
---
This is because the original access is through a restricted pointer, so the
check is conservatively correct at this point. We can move it to the
point where the vector pointer is created (but somehow I cannot make
--
janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #4 from sherpya at netfarm dot it 2008-09-22 09:51 ---
I've also seen crashes in alloca(), at least according to gdb backtrace
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37584
--- Comment #14 from irar at il dot ibm dot com 2008-09-22 09:24 ---
This patch causes the following failures on ppc:
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr35821-altivec.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 1
loops" 1
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/slp-perm-1.c scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 1 loops" 1
FAIL
--- Comment #38 from pluto at agmk dot net 2008-09-22 09:21 ---
(In reply to comment #37)
> Created an attachment (id=16361)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16361&action=view) [edit]
> Updated patch
>
> Could someone test updated patch?
>
it doesn't build.
../../g
--- Comment #4 from irar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 07:57 ---
Subject: Bug 37482
Author: irar
Date: Mon Sep 22 07:55:39 2008
New Revision: 140544
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=140544
Log:
PR tree-optimization/37482
* tree-vectorizer.h (str
--- Comment #2 from gernot dot hillier at siemens dot com 2008-09-22 07:21
---
Created an attachment (id=16376)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16376&action=view)
preprocessed version of the code triggering the bug
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=
--- Comment #1 from gernot dot hillier at siemens dot com 2008-09-22 07:19
---
Created an attachment (id=16375)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16375&action=view)
C file showing the problem
See the body of f1 for the two cases. Using "f3( f2)" triggers the problem
w
When I try to use protected function pointers in a shared library, I experience
strange behaviour: directly passing a function name triggers an invalid
relocation during linking stage while it works when assigning the function name
to a global variable first.
This report might be a duplicate to th
86 matches
Mail list logo
