Re: Possibly fixed in gcc 4.1.1, but bug box -- Was: Re: A smaller self contained test case ...

[M E Leypold <development-2006-8ecbb5cc8aREMOVETHIS@ANDTHATm-e-leypold.de>]

"Alex R. Mosteo" <devnull@mailinator.com> writes:

> > 
> > I've not been expecting anything else, since I've some experience with
> > maintaining gcc on various platforms and dread out of experience what
> > will happen if on tries to change the tool chain in just some hours.
> 
> Last time I heard, Ada is not a release criterion for gcc. As I understand

Oh d***. I compile a lot of real live code. So I'm not even sure
wether my program isn't illegal somwhere but got accepted by
unjustifiedly by 3.15p.

> it, this means that the gcc version, even if GMGPL, can be in any state. It

I had heard good things about 4.1.1 here, which was the reason I just
tested that avenue of getting rid of the Read/Write bug with variant
records. Since it doesn't work I'll concentrate on a more immediate
workaround and see, wether I cannot help Debain people to get 4.1.1
into Etch and migrate then (mind you, I'm nor actually promising any
help here just now, since GtkAda, this bug and all the "it's not fair
to work with free software", whatever, did cost me way too much time).

> could be perfectly ok yesterday, and today be broken in subtle ways, and
> this wouldn't alter the gcc releasing schedule.

I understand. On would wish that we (the Ada community, if I'm still
allowed to include myself here) could develop enough influence to
change that.

> It's for this reason, coupled with the fact that AdaCore endorsed versions
> use 3.4.6 as backend and not 4.x, and with the fact that gnat is enduring

3.4 at least still has the Read/Write bug. So even if it might be
better than 4.1. in some respects, it won't solve my problem.

> heavy changes due to the addition of 2005 features, that I hold very low
> expectatives on the gcc-gnat, for the time being.

But I understand what you're saying here. Thanks for the info, my
hopes where actually higher, but I learn to adjust them :-).

> > Let that be a lesson to those that don't hold dear their old compiler
> > versions: Changing to new version will just get you new, different
> > sneaky bugs, not less :-).
> 
> Ah, the times when one never ever ran in a compiler bug...

Turbo Pascal. The only bugs I ever complained to the German Borland
(Heimsoeth) dependence about where my own misconceptions.

Regards -- Markus