Date:	Tue, 25 May 1999 14:43:19 +0200
From:	Hans-Bernhard Broeker <broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de>
Message-Id:	<199905251243.OAA08380@acp3bf.physik.rwth-aachen.de>
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: Exe size!!!
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Organization:	RWTH Aachen, III. physikalisches Institut B
X-Newsreader:	TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

In article <37422122 DOT 6EDD81BF AT unb DOT ca> you wrote:
[...]

>     I had a problem like that, a LONG time ago.  I made an image
> processor, and it gave a different output image when -O2 was used.
> There are 2 main possibilities:
> 1)    gcc is optimizing in a way it shouldn't.
> 2)    Your [my] code is written using unintended side-effects of some actions
> which are optimized out of the program.

>     I don't know which one is the correct one, but it is always
> easier to blame someone other than yourself.

It would be, if it were not gcc we're talking about. Effectively, you
cannot possibly 'blame' gcc for anything, as you have everything
available to fix every possible problem that gcc might have, except
for the necessary expertise in compiler writing, maybe. So by saying
"gcc gets this wrong", you're consequently blaming yourself, saying
"I'm too lazy to dig up the actual root of this problem myself"

--
Hans-Bernhard Broeker (broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de)
Even if all the snow were burnt, ashes would remain.

- Raw text -