mponent: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: mendola at gmail dot com
Created attachment 30753
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30753&action=edit
Preprocessed files (with and without -std=c++0x)
$ g++ -v
Using built-in spe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57862
--- Comment #6 from Gaetano Mendola ---
That's clear to me.
I'm writing in C not in assembler, what I'm trying to understand is if I have
to
threat the following code:
struct in_addr myInAddr;
myInAddr.s_addr = theIpHeader->daddr;
as not po
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57862
--- Comment #4 from Gaetano Mendola ---
At this point I'm very puzzled. The fact I have to use memcpy instead of an
assignment for sake of portability is plain wrong.
Consider that only looking at:
struct in_addr myInAddr;
myInAddr.s_addr =
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57862
--- Comment #2 from Gaetano Mendola ---
I had 0. Putting 2 or 3 fixed the problem. Now my question is: who is faulty?
Kernel configuration on this platform, the architecture, the compiler or even
me ?
BTW, compiling that code with clang even with
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: mendola at gmail dot com
Created attachment 30481
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30481&action=edit
The preprocessed file
# uname -a
Linux tqma28 2.6.35.3 #1 PREEMPT Sun Sep 11 17:38:39 CEST 2011 armv5t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55449
--- Comment #10 from Gaetano Mendola 2012-11-24
17:49:41 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> (In reply to comment #8)
> > Jonathan, I have nothing against you personaly, what you wrote is:
> >
> > "GCC 4.4 is no longer supported, and the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55449
--- Comment #8 from Gaetano Mendola 2012-11-24
12:25:35 UTC ---
Jonathan, I have nothing against you personaly, what you wrote is:
"GCC 4.4 is no longer supported, and the problem *seems* to be already fixed in
current releases."
and
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55449
--- Comment #5 from Gaetano Mendola 2012-11-24
06:57:16 UTC ---
I have no problem to pay someone, I'm a bit disappointed seeing a bug closed
because "new version works" without investigate if the problem is still there
in new versions but
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55449
--- Comment #3 from Gaetano Mendola 2012-11-24
06:27:06 UTC ---
Time to adopt ICC.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55449
Bug #: 55449
Summary: [4.4.3] pure virtual call only with -O1/2/3
(boost::optional)
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.3
Status: UNCONFI
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: mendola at gmail dot com
GCC build triplet: 4.4.3
GCC host triplet: 4.4.3
GCC target
11 matches
Mail list logo
