--- Comment #13 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-10 10:36
---
> I put the call of error into a new function and put a breakpoint on that.
> The breakpoint on the new function is not hit when Emacs is starting. So,
> I can only conclude that the underlying problem is not a
--- Comment #12 from simon dot marshall at misys dot com 2008-03-10 10:28
---
> You really need to put the breakpoint on 'error' to be sure. Source location
> information is seriously shaken by optimization in the 4.x series of compilers
> so I wouldn't rely on it to put breakpoints in
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35249
--- Comment #11 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-04 09:14
---
> The original motivation for this report was that I was trying to reproduce the
> occasional problem of error being called (a "this should never happen" sanity
> check) at this place in the code. I thought I ha
--- Comment #10 from simon dot marshall at misys dot com 2008-02-26 10:36
---
With CFLAGS="-g -O1 -fno-unit-at-a-time -fno-crossjumping -Wno-pointer-sign", I
cannot hit the breakpoint on error (ie, if I put a breakpoint on error itself).
Also, I cannot hit the breakpoint at intervals2.
--- Comment #9 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-24 21:47
---
Could you put the breakpoint on the 'error' function rather than at line 34
and examine again the condition when it is hit? Does the problem arise if
you add -fno-delayed-branch on the command line?
--
http:
