Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 16:58:16 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
To: Vik Heyndrickx <Vik DOT Heyndrickx AT rug DOT ac DOT be>
cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Program Crashes!!! Please help! Memory errors!!!
In-Reply-To: <358F8DCC.30F2@rug.ac.be>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.980625165520.28316L-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk


On Tue, 23 Jun 1998, Vik Heyndrickx wrote:

> > On Tue, 23 Jun 1998, Vik Heyndrickx wrote:
> > 
> > > I thought that omitting any -0* meant -O0.
> > 
> > It should.  Perhaps they've changed their specs file so that it specifies
> > -O by default?  Adding -v should print all the options, both compiled
> > into the binary and those from specs.
> 
> I need to recheck this, but I thought I got at home the same results
> with DJGPP as with Solaris. 

GCC 2.7.2.1 (in the DJGPP port) does behave identically with -O0 and 
without -O?.  However, you were right: the warning about unused variables 
is printed even with -O0, so it seems my memory was from some old version 
of GCC (or just downright wrong).  Sorry for posting misinformation.

The "variable might be used before it's initialized" warning *does* need 
the optimization switch.