On 11/04/2013 21:42, Thomas Wolff wrote:
> Am 11.04.2013 14:34, schrieb Dave Korn:
>> Also, I don't plan on doing it unless there's significant demand.
> I would appreciate to keep it as gcc-3.
Fancy being the maintainer for it then? ;-)
> The reason is quite peculiar; gcc-4
> changed the order of variables in the stack frame of a function call, which
> led to one very specific interworking malfunction (between mintty and
> mined) which in turn unveiled a very subtle bug. This is material for very
> interesting debugging exercises for students... Not sure whether it's
> significant but the changed variable order might in fact affect other
> software as well. ------ Thomas
Only seriously buggy software. Anything in a C program that attempts to
make inferences about the layout of the stack frame is invoking undefined
behaviour.
cheers,
DaveK
