Andrew Haley wrote:
Vladimir Simonov writes:
> Andrew Haley wrote:
> > Vladimir Simonov writes:
> > > Andrew Haley wrote:
> > > > Vladimir Simonov writes:
> > > > Fillet that, and you will have a test case that can be submitted.
> > >
> > > It requires a lot of mannual work - remove a peace of code, then
> > > check that the test can be built, the check that the bug did not
> > > disappear, etc.
> >
> > It's your code, so presumably you are familiar with it. I stepped
> > though the code in gdb, and it seemed that not many routines were
> > actually involved.
>
> We have tried to minimize the test but without significant success.
> If we try to create simple test case from scratch we can't
> reproduce the problem. I have a feeling the problem appears
> if huge templated code involved into codegeneration.
>
> If I understand correct it is impossible to file this
> bug to gcc bugzilla - it does not permit attachements.
>
> Do you think I need to post the problem to some another
> list to get it solved? Or just leave it( and you :) ) alone?
It all depends on what you need. I have this feeling that your
problem may well be fixed by a more recent g++. It's hard to be sure,
because your test case does not even compile with a more recent g++.
This is, I suspect, becasue we have improved g++ to be closer to the
real ISO C++ standard.
g++ Version 4.3 reports a number of type mismatch errors in the area
that may be causing problems. It is quite possible that if you fix
these errors your problem will go away.
Ok, thank you.
We'll try to fix sources to be compatible with gcc 4.3.
And check the issue.
Could you advise somehow working gcc 4.3 CVS snapshot?
Link to tarballs would be very helpfull.
We are using 4.1.2 because it is the latest stable version.
Regards
Vladimir
