From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-79942-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 23880 invoked by alias); 29 Jul 2003 14:14:54 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 23873 invoked from network); 29 Jul 2003 14:14:53 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO uniton.integrable-solutions.net) (62.212.99.186)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 29 Jul 2003 14:14:53 -0000
Received: from uniton.integrable-solutions.net (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by uniton.integrable-solutions.net (8.12.3/8.12.3/SuSE Linux 0.6) with ESMTP id h6TEEeSu014451;
	Tue, 29 Jul 2003 16:14:40 +0200
Received: (from gdr@localhost)
	by uniton.integrable-solutions.net (8.12.3/8.12.3/Submit) id h6TEEekq014450;
	Tue, 29 Jul 2003 16:14:40 +0200
X-Authentication-Warning: uniton.integrable-solutions.net: gdr set sender to gdr@integrable-solutions.net using -f
To: Steven Bosscher <s.bosscher@student.tudelft.nl>
Cc: Richard Guenther <rguenth@tat.physik.uni-tuebingen.de>, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: std::pow implementation
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0307291353040.14031-100000@bellatrix.tat.physik.uni-tuebingen.de>
	<m3he55tu7y.fsf@uniton.integrable-solutions.net>
	<1059481647.3651.120.camel@steven.lr-s.tudelft.nl>
	<m3wue1se52.fsf@uniton.integrable-solutions.net>
	<1059483328.3651.144.camel@steven.lr-s.tudelft.nl>
	<m34r15scu3.fsf@uniton.integrable-solutions.net>
	<1059487859.3650.208.camel@steven.lr-s.tudelft.nl>
From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@integrable-solutions.net>
In-Reply-To: <1059487859.3650.208.camel@steven.lr-s.tudelft.nl>
Organization: Integrable Solutions
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2003 14:24:00 -0000
Message-ID: <m37k61pghb.fsf@uniton.integrable-solutions.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-SW-Source: 2003-07/txt/msg01992.txt.bz2

Steven Bosscher <s.bosscher@student.tudelft.nl> writes:

| Op di 29-07-2003, om 15:05 schreef Gabriel Dos Reis:
| > | No, I've shown that inline still has a meaning in GCC whereas you
| > | claimed that "it was decided that the compiler knows better than the
| > | programmer", i.e. the compiler overrules the user.
| > 
| > And what I claimed corresponds to reality.  See
| > 
| >    http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2003-05/msg00014.html
| 
| You're just pointing to a mail that shows that warnings appeared after
| the fix for PR10180 and half a dozen duplicates went in (the first
| report being almost as old as the hard-coded limits in tree-inline.c,
| still cp/optimize.c back then).

Please do focuse on the message, not the medium.

The warnings are just the symptoms of a deeper disease, and I'm not
talking about the symptoms.  But about the disease.

The deeper disease is explained in the follow-up to the link I gave.

    http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2003-05/msg00012.html

-- Gaby