From: "Dave Korn" <davek-ml@ntlworld.com>
To: <dewar@gnat.com>, <geoffk@redhat.com>
Cc: <amylaar@cambridge.redhat.com>, <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Is this a gcc bug?
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 16:53:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <00c501c07e8d$6cf814e0$0550a8c0@ubik> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20010115001421.9DD9134D80@nile.gnat.com>
----- Original Message -----
From: <dewar@gnat.com>
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 12:14 AM
> <<It doesn't follow, though, that the printf output is not interleaved
> with the mandatory diagnostics (if any).
> >>
>
> That's different from my reading, my reading is that the mandatory
> diagnostics have to come out even if the section of code is not run.
>
> The printf output comes out only if the section of code is run.
>
> Of course if there are mandatory diagnostics, then exeution is
> undefined in any case.
So when compiling a case like this, we could print out a short and
obtuse error message, and output an executable which when run prints the
long sermon explanation to stderr :)
DaveK
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-01-14 16:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-01-14 16:14 dewar
2001-01-14 16:53 ` Dave Korn [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-06-16 13:01 Is this a GCC bug? Bingfeng Mei
2008-06-16 13:33 ` Bingfeng Mei
2001-01-17 23:30 Is this a gcc bug? Axel Kittenberger
2001-01-16 17:06 dewar
2001-01-14 5:31 dewar
2001-01-14 15:51 ` Geoff Keating
2001-01-12 19:15 dewar
2001-01-12 19:29 ` Fergus Henderson
2001-01-12 19:14 dewar
2001-01-12 19:36 ` Alexandre Oliva
2001-01-12 18:21 dewar
2001-01-12 18:29 ` Joseph S. Myers
2001-01-12 18:49 ` Alexandre Oliva
2001-01-12 18:58 ` Fergus Henderson
2001-01-13 10:34 ` James Dennett
2001-01-16 17:01 ` Michael Eager
2001-01-17 3:21 ` Falk Hueffner
2001-01-17 14:57 ` Michael Eager
2001-01-12 1:18 Axel Kittenberger
2001-01-12 18:14 ` Alexandre Oliva
2001-01-12 19:11 ` Fergus Henderson
2001-01-13 3:21 ` Richard Earnshaw
2001-01-11 10:38 dewar
2001-01-11 10:30 dewar
2001-01-11 10:05 dewar
2001-01-11 10:00 David Korn
2001-01-11 21:36 ` Andy Walker
2001-01-13 18:45 ` Joern Rennecke
2001-01-14 2:21 ` Geoff Keating
2001-01-11 7:07 dewar
2001-01-11 5:53 dewar
2001-01-11 6:06 ` Bernd Schmidt
2001-01-11 8:40 ` Per Bothner
2001-01-11 9:03 ` Richard Earnshaw
2001-01-11 9:27 ` Alexandre Oliva
2001-01-11 9:33 ` Joe Buck
2001-01-11 9:38 ` Bernd Schmidt
2001-01-11 9:44 ` Richard Earnshaw
2001-01-11 10:57 ` Neil Booth
2001-01-11 5:49 dewar
2001-01-11 3:04 David Korn
2001-01-11 2:11 Uros Bizjak
2001-01-11 3:04 ` Alexandre Oliva
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='00c501c07e8d$6cf814e0$0550a8c0@ubik' \
--to=davek-ml@ntlworld.com \
--cc=amylaar@cambridge.redhat.com \
--cc=dewar@gnat.com \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=geoffk@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).