RE: bug in gcc3.3.1

2003-12-05 Thread Brian Ford
On Fri, 5 Dec 2003, Jörg Schaible wrote: > Brian Ford wrote on Thursday, December 04, 2003 10:47 PM: > > On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Jörg Schaible wrote: > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on Thursday, December 04, 2003 2:38 PM: > >>> what was the reason for dropping the support? > >>> ( I have to now fix few li

RE: bug in gcc3.3.1

2003-12-05 Thread Jörg Schaible
Jörg Schaible wrote on Friday, December 05, 2003 10:04 AM: > In case you did not know ... Sorry, could not resist. Regards, Jörg -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs

RE: bug in gcc3.3.1

2003-12-05 Thread Jörg Schaible
Brian Ford wrote on Thursday, December 04, 2003 10:47 PM: > On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Jörg Schaible wrote: >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on Thursday, December 04, 2003 2:38 PM: >>> what was the reason for dropping the support? >>> ( I have to now fix few lines of code!!) >> >> It is not ANSI compatible and

RE: bug in gcc3.3.1

2003-12-04 Thread Brian Ford
On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Jörg Schaible wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on Thursday, December 04, 2003 2:38 PM: > > what was the reason for dropping the support? > > ( I have to now fix few lines of code!!) > > It is not ANSI compatible and therefore not portable. > In case you didn't know, ANSI defined

RE: bug in gcc3.3.1

2003-12-04 Thread Jörg Schaible
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on Thursday, December 04, 2003 2:38 PM: > what was the reason for dropping the support? > ( I have to now fix few lines of code!!) It is not ANSI compatible and therefore not portable. Regards, Jörg -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Probl

Re: bug in gcc3.3.1

2003-12-04 Thread Max Bowsher
anx for the quick response >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>> hello: >>> >>> I found conssitent bug in gcc3.3.1 >>> >>> gcc2xx will compile the fiollwowing with no problem >>> >>> printf (" .. >>> xxx ", ..

Re: bug in gcc3.3.1

2003-12-04 Thread kumarchi
what was the reason for dropping the support? ( I have to now fix few lines of code!!) thanx for the quick response > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > hello: > > > > I found conssitent bug in gcc3.3.1 > > > > gcc2xx will compile the fiollwowin

Re: bug in gcc3.3.1

2003-12-03 Thread Larry Hall
At 05:41 PM 12/3/2003, Max Bowsher you wrote: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> hello: >> >> I found conssitent bug in gcc3.3.1 >> >> gcc2xx will compile the fiollwowing with no problem >> >> printf (" .. >> xxx ", ..) >

Re: bug in gcc3.3.1

2003-12-03 Thread Larry Hall
At 05:41 PM 12/3/2003, Krzysztof Duleba you wrote: >kumarchi wrote: > >> I found conssitent bug in gcc3.3.1 >> >> gcc2xx will compile the fiollwowing with no problem >> >> printf (" .. >> xxx ", ..) >> >> where the

Re: bug in gcc3.3.1

2003-12-03 Thread Max Bowsher
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > hello: > > I found conssitent bug in gcc3.3.1 > > gcc2xx will compile the fiollwowing with no problem > > printf (" .. > xxx ", ..) > > where the format ".. > xxx " includes a new line c

Re: bug in gcc3.3.1

2003-12-03 Thread Krzysztof Duleba
kumarchi wrote: > I found conssitent bug in gcc3.3.1 > > gcc2xx will compile the fiollwowing with no problem > > printf (" .. > xxx ", ..) > > where the format ".. > xxx " includes a new line character. > > gcc3

bug in gcc3.3.1

2003-12-03 Thread kumarchi
hello: I found conssitent bug in gcc3.3.1 gcc2xx will compile the fiollwowing with no problem printf (" .. xxx ", ..) where the format ".. xxx " includes a new line character. gcc3.3 will nto compile this and looks like it will allow an expl