--- Comment #5 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-05-15 16:49 ---
Feedback not forthcoming.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAIT
--- Comment #4 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-03 18:05 ---
This is being treated as a placeholder until there is actually information for
reproducing the issue for the rest of us
For information on the kinds of performance test cases that are useful, please
consult the fi
--- Comment #3 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-11-07 17:41 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> I actually disagree with that. We really need more info (I don't have the
> profiles to see why we are calling this too much but we really need to figure
> it out).
Whatever... ;)
--
http:/
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-07 17:39 ---
I actually disagree with that. We really need more info (I don't have the
profiles to see why we are calling this too much but we really need to figure
it out).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24
--- Comment #1 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-11-07 17:38 ---
.. on the other hand, I think we should close this one, sorry ;) As long as we
have a reference counted string and the user cannot disable the use of atomic
operations when single threaded, there isn't much we can do. Agree
