Date:	Thu, 16 Sep 1999 14:51:52 +0200 (IST)
From:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender:	eliz AT is
To:	Andris Pavenis <pavenis AT lanet DOT lv>
cc:	Laurynas Biveinis <lauras AT softhome DOT net>,
	DJGPP Workers <djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com>
Subject:	Re: Signed - unsigned comparison in dosexe.c
In-Reply-To:	<Pine.A41.4.05.9909161451410.42536-100000@ieva01.lanet.lv>
Message-ID:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.990916144857.8587B-100000@is>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Thu, 16 Sep 1999, Andris Pavenis wrote:

> > So I think this should be fixed differently.  In any case, the library
> > is not guaranteed to be compatible with GCC 2.95 yet; there are
> > probably more problems to sort out.
> > 
> 
> At least I haven't seen problems with gcc-2.95.1 yet.

Perhaps it's just my personal paranoia.  I see too many bug reports on 
bug-gcc, most of them turn out to be due to GCC 2.95 being much less
permissive than the previous versions.  The strict aliasing being on by 
default is especially frightening (because it isn't detected at compile 
time).

- Raw text -