X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-ID: <4C49A4A9.8040501@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 15:18:17 +0100 From: Dave Korn User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: When will the next gcc come out References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com On 23/07/2010 10:02, Huang Bambo wrote: > > Gcc optimized out some code like > *fp++ = *format_string ++; > > When I gdb to that line and "print fp", gdb reported that fp is optized out... You need to check in more detail than that. GCC may have optimised away the fp variable, but kept the functionality implied by the line. You'd need to study the assembly code to see if it really did what the C code said it should do or not. cheers, DaveK -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple