On Oct 10, 2005, at 20:24, Andy Dougherty wrote:
Why? --optimize does at least two different things: First,
obviously, it
allows the compiler to optimize. This is often a good strategy for
exposing faulty assumptions in code. Second, it enables the
DISABLE_GC_DEBUG define, which changes th
On Fri, 7 Oct 2005, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
>
> On Oct 7, 2005, at 20:52, Andy Dougherty wrote:
>
> > perl Configure.pl --optimize=-O3 --debugging=0 --cc=gcc --ld=gcc
> > --link=gcc
>
> ...
> Andy slowly please. No --optimize tests yet. Let's first look at plain default
> build.
Why? --opt
On Oct 7, 2005, at 20:52, Andy Dougherty wrote:
perl Configure.pl --optimize=-O3 --debugging=0 --cc=gcc --ld=gcc
--link=gcc
...
Andy slowly please. No --optimize tests yet. Let's first look at plain
default build.
Intel x86/gcc-3.3.5, built with
perl Configure.pl --optimize=
On Thu, 6 Oct 2005, Leopold Toetsch via RT wrote:
> Leopold Toetsch wrote:
>
> > ... When now this pointer (ctx.rctx) is
> > declared being 'void *' it should be compatible with any other pointer
> > to a structure.
>
> I've now rewritten the questioanable code to use a (void*) allocation
> p
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
... When now this pointer (ctx.rctx) is
declared being 'void *' it should be compatible with any other pointer
to a structure.
I've now rewritten the questioanable code to use a (void*) allocation
pointer. I hope it's better now.
Could you please try r9367, and repor
Andy Dougherty wrote:
On Tue, 4 Oct 2005, Leopold Toetsch via RT wrote:
Anyway, does:
p = (struct Parrot_Context *) ( (char *) p + ALIGNED_CTX_SIZE );
help, or better is it "more correct"?
While this does indeed replace the warning by a different warning ("cast
increases required alig
On Tue, 4 Oct 2005, Leopold Toetsch via RT wrote:
> On Oct 4, 2005, at 19:06, Andrew Dougherty wrote:
> > src/inter_create.c:400: warning: dereferencing type-punned pointer
> > will
> > break strict-aliasing rules
>
> The line reads:
>
> LVALUE_CAST(char *, p) += ALIGNED_CTX_S
On Oct 4, 2005, at 19:06, Andrew Dougherty wrote:
Ok, I've finally found the cause of this one, but I don't have a
portable
patch at hand.
Buried in amongst the 6827 warnings emitted by gcc is one that actually
correctly identifies the problem:
There must be some really heavily used macros
On Fri, 30 Sep 2005, Andy Dougherty wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Sep 2005, Leopold Toetsch via RT wrote:
>
> > Andy Dougherty (via RT) wrote:
> >
> > > With a a fresh checkout (r9274) I get a number of errors where parrot
> > > eventually
> > > gobbles up all the memory on the system. Here's the first
On Fri, 30 Sep 2005, Leopold Toetsch via RT wrote:
> Andy Dougherty (via RT) wrote:
>
> > With a a fresh checkout (r9274) I get a number of errors where parrot
> > eventually
> > gobbles up all the memory on the system. Here's the first such one:
> >
> > t/op/gc
> > #
Andy Dougherty (via RT) wrote:
With a a fresh checkout (r9274) I get a number of errors where parrot eventually
gobbles up all the memory on the system. Here's the first such one:
t/op/gc
# Failed test (t/op/gc.t at line 279)
# './parrot --gc-debug "/home/doughe
On 9/29/05, via RT Andy Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> # '
> # expected: '3 * 5 == 15!
> # '
> # './parrot --gc-debug
> "/home/doughera/src/parrot/parrot-andy/t/op/gc_13.pir"' failed with exit code
> 131
> # Looks like you failed 1 test of 22.
this same test fails on win32, however
# New Ticket Created by Andy Dougherty
# Please include the string: [perl #37308]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=37308 >
With a a fresh checkout (r9274) I get a number of errors where parrot eventually
gobb
13 matches
Mail list logo
