Claus Fischer writes: > On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 10:18:26AM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote: > : Claus Fischer writes: > : > > : > I think I found a code generation bug in GCC 4.0.1. > : > > : > I'm sending this mail to make sure this bug is known and > : > is or will be removed in newer versions. > : > On a quick glance I couldn't find it in the bug database, > : > so it may not be known. > : > : Redirected to gcc-help. > : > : Please send a full test case that can be run, with full information > : about the expected effect. > > > The full test case is way too big to run and contains data > which I don't have authority to disclose publicly. I'm not asking for your full code. If you believe that the bug is in the code generated for the source you posted, presumably you can create a test wrapper. Experience over meny years has shown us that this is the bet way to find and fix bugs in gcc. It's much more productive than staring at thousands of lines of assembly language. > I was hoping that someone could take a look at the assembler > code since I'm not proficient in assembly. > > I've already spent four hours tracking the bug to this location, > I just can't verify that the assembly conforms with what I deduce > from observable behaviour. The problem is that gcc reorders and reorganizes code to such an extent that it can be exceedingly hard to find the equivalent code. Andrew.
