On Fri, 28 May 2004, mathias.wagner wrote:
> To: "Gerrit @ cygwin"
http://www.cygwin.com/acronyms/#PCYMTNQREAIYR
> Meanwhile I have had some help from another colleague here at Philips and
> he found out that the -m96bit-long-double compile option works fine.
My understanding is t
To: "Gerrit @ cygwin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc: Mathias Wagner/HBG/SC/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: GCC 3.3.1 problem with printf %Lg %Lg and
-m128bit-long-double compile
option
Classification:
> On Thu, 27 May 2004, Ge
On Thu, 27 May 2004, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
> Hallo mathias,
>
> > GCC 3.3.1 has a problem when printing multiple long double variables using
> > printf and the -m128bit-long-double compile option on a Pentium-based
> > machine.
>
> Seems to be a bug in gcc, for bug reporting instructions, please
Hallo mathias,
> GCC 3.3.1 has a problem when printing multiple long double variables using
> printf and the -m128bit-long-double compile option on a Pentium-based
> machine.
Seems to be a bug in gcc, for bug reporting instructions, please see:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html.
> compile the code
It seems that you aren't supposed to return internal automatic
references! :-) The compiler should have warned but didn't.
--- Gerry Reno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm having a problem with gcc 3.3.1. Here is a sample program that
> demos the problem:
>
> XYZ * somefunc () {
> XYZ
On Mon, 29 Sep 2003, Gerry Reno wrote:
> I'm having a problem with gcc 3.3.1. Here is a sample program that
> demos the problem:
>
> // test.c
> #include
> #include
>
> typedef struct abc {
> HANDLE h1;
> HANDLE h2;
> } XYZ;
>
> XYZ * somefunc () {
> XYZ xyz;
> XYZ *ptr = &xyz;
>
>
Hi Gerry,
you return a pointer to an object on the stack, that is no longer valid after leaving
your function. So any value printed in main is undefined and you can get any result.
Regards,
Jörg
Gerry Reno wrote on Monday, September 29, 2003 9:34 AM:
> I'm having a problem with gcc 3.3.1. H
7 matches
Mail list logo
