--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 18:44
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19530
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 18:46
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-01/msg01351.html
--
What|Removed |Added
Statu
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20
19:06 ---
Subject: Bug 19418
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-20 19:06:28
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog
gcc/config/i386: e
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 19:09
---
Fixed.
If someone wants to go over the rest of the headers item by item and compare
them to the Intel documentation, that would be great. But by eyes claim
they'll go on strike if I try to do that.
--
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20 19:12
---
(In reply to comment #4)
> This functionality is missing after FP compares rewrite...
No, it got moved to ix86_expand_fp_movcc.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19506
--- Additional Comments From gdr at integrable-solutions dot net
2005-01-20 19:19 ---
Subject: Re: New: Difference in behaviour if default constructor added
"chris at bubblescope dot net" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| While looking at PR 19510, I noticed the following strangeness.
|
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20
19:20 ---
Subject: Bug 15349
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-20 19:20:40
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog timevar.def tree-cfg.c
--- Additional Comments From chris at bubblescope dot net 2005-01-20 19:25
---
I never thought it was a bug in the library :)
I however throught (incorrectly) that copying an unassigned pointer was valid,
mainly as some other test case was considering constructing
std::vector::iterator>
--- Additional Comments From hjl at lucon dot org 2005-01-20 19:28 ---
Depending on the psABI, because of copy relocation on data symbols and
function pointer on function symbols, a protected symbol has to be
treated very carefully. We have to check 2 things:
1. If the psABI uses copy re
--- Additional Comments From gnu_andrew at member dot fsf dot org
2005-01-20 19:37 ---
This testcase fails on gcj (up to 3.4 at least), GNU Classpath CVS HEAD and
Sun's JDK. Reading the specification for java.util.ResourceBundle suggests that
this is the correct behaviour; the combinati
--- Additional Comments From gdr at integrable-solutions dot net
2005-01-20 19:42 ---
Subject: Re: Difference in behaviour if default constructor added
"chris at bubblescope dot net" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| I'm still curious as to why the error doesn't appear if let g++ generate
--- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot edu 2005-01-20 19:49
---
Just checked in a fix.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20
20:09 ---
Subject: Bug 19124
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-20 20:09:23
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog dwarf2out.c
Log message:
--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20
20:15 ---
Fixed
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
test.c
---
using the following GCC
---
$ gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Configured with: ../../../gcc-CVS-20050120/gcc-CVS-20050120/configure
--host=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu --prefix=/usr/local/opt/gcc-4.0
--exec-prefix=/usr/local/opt/gcc-4.0 --s
--
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||3.4.1 4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19549
--- Additional Comments From lars dot sonchocky-helldorf at hamburg dot de
2005-01-20 20:43 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> Objective-C is not part of the release criteria; removing target milestone.
Mark, allow me to mention that GCC offers the only free Objective-C compiler
with moder
--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2005-01-20 20:46
---
To be completely clear, the compiler generated default constructor is
ptr() : a(0) {}
not
ptr() {}
Thus, it _does_ initialize 'a'.
W.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19544
--- Additional Comments From caj at cs dot york dot ac dot uk 2005-01-20
21:04 ---
Subject: Re: Difference in behaviour if default constructor
added
bangerth at dealii dot org wrote:
>--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2005-01-20 20:46
>---
>To be compl
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20
21:04 ---
*** Bug 19549 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20
21:04 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 11203 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15349
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20
21:22 ---
Not a bug via the documentation.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20
21:38 ---
You can track the plans and status for structure aliasing on the gcc wiki, at
[[Improved alias analysis]]
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14784
--- Additional Comments From zlaski at apple dot com 2005-01-20 21:48
---
Of course, for this particular bug, someone could just review the patch that I
posted two months ago...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18408
--- Additional Comments From poirierg at gmail dot com 2005-01-20 22:00
---
Hi,
I just tried with a fresh cvs checkout. It works! Thanks! (should I mark this
bug as VERIFIED ?)
Regards,
Guillaume
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19472
Here is another example where the strong attribute goes funny (this is reduced
from 23_containers/
vector/modifiers/swap.cc with -D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG on). This is a regression in
that we did not ICE
before. 3.4 also rejects the code too so the reject valid is not a regression
but fixing the the
--
What|Removed |Added
BugsThisDependsOn||19551
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5900
fails with gfortran-20050120 on cygwin
test case ##
program claic1_bug
real x, correct
parameter(correct=2.30457878)
call claic1(x)
if ( abs(x-correct) .gt. 1.0e-4 ) then
write(6,*) 'x = ', x,' expected ',correct
--- Additional Comments From hjl at lucon dot org 2005-01-20 22:34 ---
Ignore the copy relocation. There is not much a compiler can do when the psABI
doesn't support protected symbols with copy relocation. See:
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/2003-03/msg00413.html
--
http://gcc
--- Additional Comments From billingd at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20
22:38 ---
PR 19551 contains a reduced testcase derived from a gfortran failure in the
CLS Driver routines.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5900
--- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20
22:58 ---
Does this 8% regression apply to preprocessed source, or only to unpreprocessed
source? If the latter, then this PR should be closed as WONTFIX; the runtime
library has gotten bigger, and that makes things
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-01-20 23:01
---
Reopening...
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-01-20 23:02
---
... as "enhancement".
--
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhanc
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-01-20 23:27
---
Andrew, thanks for the help: I'm sure that as a latent bug this will be fixed
very quickly, then I will close 18902 and so on. Nice. Would it be possible not
marking this as "minor"?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzi
Test file is only 30 lines (t5.cxx, the t5.ii is indentical and is included at
the end. Comments explain the bug:
template
class mc_foo {
int _d;
public:
mc_foo() {}
mc_foo(int x) { _d = x; }
mc_foo(const mc_foo &x) { _d = x._d; }
build of gnustep base crashes
--
Summary: ice in check_pointer_types_r
Product: gcc
Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: objc
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Additional Comments From rogelio at smsglobal dot net 2005-01-20 23:39
---
Created an attachment (id=8023)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8023&action=view)
preprocessed source
in GNUstep core/base
created using the command line:
gcc Source/GSSet.m -v -save-tem
--- Additional Comments From rogelio at smsglobal dot net 2005-01-20 23:40
---
Created an attachment (id=8024)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8024&action=view)
the result of gcc -v -savetemps and the error report when building
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show
std::insert_iterator does not work together with __gnu_cxx::hash_set,
since the latter does not provide insert(iterator, const value_type&).
--
Summary: std::insert_iterator does not work together with
__gnu_cxx::hash_set
Product: gcc
Version:
--- Additional Comments From reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20
23:52 ---
Andrew, what happended to the patch?
--
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
--- Additional Comments From reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-20
23:52 ---
Fails since at least gcc 2.95.3.
--
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-01-21 00:00
---
Hi, I would categorize this as "wontfix-obvious-enhancement" ;) I mean, it's
very unlikely that the hash_* extensions will be fixed, since we are in the
process of adding the new unordered containers in "tr1", whic
--
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||3.4.3
Summary|ice in check_pointer_types_r|ice in check_pointer_types_r
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-21
00:15 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 18408 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-21
00:15 ---
*** Bug 19553 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
namespace __gnu_debug_def { }
namespace std
{
using namespace __gnu_debug_def;
template class allocator {};
}
namespace __gnu_debug_def
{
template >
class vector
{
void
swap(vector<_Tp,_Allocator>& __x);
};
}
namespace std
{
template<> void
vector >::swap(vector
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19555
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-21
00:24 ---
Mark, typecode.ii ;-)
So it is preprocessed. That doesn't mean it's smaller though, the
preprocessed larger library is still a larger library.
Anyway, the problem here is more that compared to gcc 3.x
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-21
00:25 ---
(In reply to comment #23)
> Andrew, thanks for the help: I'm sure that as a latent bug this will be fixed
> very quickly, then I will close 18902 and so on. Nice. Would it be possible
> not
> marking this a
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
0xffe4]))
(nil)))
../../../gcc/libmudflap/mf-runtime.c:1023: internal compiler error: in
extract_insn, at recog.c:2020
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
I will attach pre-processed mf-runtime.i. This is with
(GCC) 4.0.0 20050120 (ex
--- Additional Comments From arend dot bayer at web dot de 2005-01-21
00:33 ---
Created an attachment (id=8025)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8025&action=view)
preprocessed source
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19556
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
Keywords||build, ice-on-valid-code,
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-21
00:37 ---
The code is invalid (by the C++ standard)
mc_foo val3 = val;// W3 == 16 in this example
val3.f<16>(0);
Since val3 is dependent name, we don't know that val3.f is a template so we
reject the code.
yo
--
What|Removed |Added
Component|rtl-optimization|target
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19556
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.3 |3.4.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16612
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19550
With LAST_UPDATED: "Thu Jan 20 21:30:49 UTC 2005" I get:
/home/hp/combined/mmixware-sim/gcc/xgcc -shared-libgcc
-B/home/hp/combined/mmixware-sim/gcc/ -nostdinc++ -L/home/hp/combined/mmix\
ware-sim/mmix-knuth-mmixware/libstdc++-v3/src
-L/home/hp/combined/mmixware-sim/mmix-knuth-mmixware/libstdc++-v
--- Additional Comments From ebuddington at wesleyan dot edu 2005-01-21
00:54 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Still exist in the mainline even after configure was rewritten for autoconf
> 2.57.
I believe this is the same problem I see today in gcc-3.4.3. Unless I set
CPLUS_INCLUDE_PATH,
--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-21 01:01
---
Ouch. Recompiling cc1plus with CFLAGS=-g3 masks the bug. Badness.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19557
--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-01-21
01:02 ---
Uhm, I wrote a very similar patch in the past only to find out it was not
enough. There is something I cannot understand...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19076
--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-01-21
01:05 ---
Ah well, I guess this patch is not enough for this:
---
struct A {
void func(void);
};
template
void foo(T A::* );
void bar(void) {
foo(&A::func);
}
-
--- Additional Comments From corsepiu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-21
01:08 ---
The required bits are on gcc-3_2-branch and gcc-3_3-branch, but are missing from
gcc-3_4-branch and gcc-CVS-trunk.
--
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Additional Comments From jvdelisle at verizon dot net 2005-01-21 01:18
---
David, Good Job! I was on exactly the same path and was just beginning to look
at CGELSY. Beat me to the punch! :)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5900
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-21
01:23 ---
Subject: Bug 19510
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-21 01:23:28
Modified files:
libstdc++-v3 : ChangeLog
libstdc++-v3/inclu
--- Additional Comments From reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-21
01:26 ---
We still have uninitialized pointers in the 3.4 and 3.3 branch.
Patches in preparation.
--
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-21
01:41 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Ouch. Recompiling cc1plus with CFLAGS=-g3 masks the bug. Badness.
Then what gcc are you building since this is a cross?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19557
--
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P2 |P3
Summary|[3.4, 4.0 regression} RTEMS |[3.4/4.0 regression} RTEMS
|CPP specs not
--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-21 01:52
---
I don't understand comment #2. Please be more specific with your implications.
I recompile cc1plus because with default options it's undebuggable with the gdb
in FC2.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-21
01:55 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> I don't understand comment #2. Please be more specific with your
> implications.
> I recompile cc1plus because with default options it's undebuggable with the
> gdb
> in FC2.
If
--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-21 01:58
---
The one in FC2: "gcc version 3.3.3 20040412 (Red Hat Linux 3.3.3-7)".
At present, I don't suspect the bug being there.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19557
--- Additional Comments From markus at oberhumer dot com 2005-01-21 02:02
---
This seems to be fixed for 3.4 and 4.0 now, so the bug should be closed.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17361
--- Additional Comments From markus at oberhumer dot com 2005-01-21 02:02
---
This seems to be fixed for 3.4 and 4.0 now, so the bug should be closed.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17115
--- Additional Comments From chrisp_42 at bigpond dot com 2005-01-21 02:04
---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Hmm, is *- special operand in Ada or is this just a parse error in the
front-end (I don't know Ada that at
You are actually fairly close. *- is not a special operator, but the mul
--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-21 02:07
---
(Please be more specific than e.g. "current GCC mainline".)
With binutils of "2005-01-20 15:37:12 UTC"
and GCC of "Fri Jan 14 01:28:39 UTC 2005"
I still get the same error.
Now updating gcc.
--
http://gcc.gnu
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-21
02:10 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > Hmm, is *- special operand in Ada or is this just a parse error in the
> front-end (I don't know Ada that at
>
> You are actually fairly close. *- i
--- Additional Comments From markus at oberhumer dot com 2005-01-21 02:10
---
What is the status of the latest patch from Giovanni ?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18071
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-21
02:11 ---
This is as reduced as I can get it (80 lines):
typedef unsigned int size_t;
extern void __assert_fail () __attribute__ ((__noreturn__));
typedef unsigned int uintptr_t;
extern int __mf_heuristic_check (uintp
--- Additional Comments From markus at oberhumer dot com 2005-01-21 02:14
---
Just a short update that the MIPS -mint64 option works again in mainline, so the
ICE reported here is back for both the 3.4 and 4.0 branches.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18744
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-21
02:14 ---
Subject: Bug 18701
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-21 02:14:27
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog combine.c
Log message:
simply compile openssl 0.9.7e with gcc 4.0 and run openssl speed (speed
benchmark).
Backtrace:
#0 0x2ad71ed4 in bn_add_words () from /usr/lib64/libcrypto.so.0.9.7
#1 0x2ad692d7 in BN_uadd () from /usr/lib64/libcrypto.so.0.9.7
#2 0x2ad70a05 in BN_mod_inverse (
--
What|Removed |Added
Severity|critical|normal
Component|c |target
Keywords||
--- Additional Comments From gdr at integrable-solutions dot net
2005-01-21 02:25 ---
Subject: Re: Difference in behaviour if default constructor added
"bangerth at dealii dot org" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| To be completely clear, the compiler generated default constructor is
|
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-21
02:27 ---
Subject: Bug 19208
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-21 02:27:17
Modified files:
gcc/cp : ChangeLog pt.c
gcc/testsuite
--- Additional Comments From gdr at integrable-solutions dot net
2005-01-21 02:28 ---
Subject: Re: Difference in behaviour if default constructor added
"caj at cs dot york dot ac dot uk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Subject: Re: Difference in behaviour if default constructor
| adde
--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-01-21
02:29 ---
Fixed in 4.0, the patch needs a little bit of tweaking for 3.4.
--
What|Removed |Added
Test file is only 30 lines (t5.cxx, the t5.ii is indentical and is included at
the end. Comments explain the bug:
template
class mc_foo {
int _d;
public:
mc_foo() {}
mc_foo(int x) { _d = x; }
mc_foo(const mc_foo &x) { _d = x._d; }
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-21
02:34 ---
This is invalid and a dup of the bug which I just closed from you, see PR 19552.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 19552 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-21
02:34 ---
*** Bug 19559 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19552
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-21
02:38 ---
Subject: Bug 18091
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-21 02:38:24
Modified files:
gcc/java : ChangeLog jcf-write.c
Log message:
--- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-21
02:39 ---
I checked in Andrew Pinski's fix.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18091
--- Additional Comments From gj at pointblue dot com dot pl 2005-01-21
02:49 ---
it looks like that in x86_64.i file:
unsigned long bn_add_words (unsigned long *rp, unsigned long *ap, unsigned long
*bp,int n)
{ unsigned long ret,i;
if (n <= 0) return 0;
asm (
--- Additional Comments From ian at airs dot com 2005-01-21 02:52 ---
Updated patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-01/msg01443.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13000
--- Additional Comments From dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-21 02:52
---
PowerPC SVR4 va_arg bug.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |
--- Additional Comments From bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-21
03:15 ---
works OK on AMD-64
fails on i686
--bud
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRM
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-21
03:17 ---
Hmm, sounds like an extensive precision problem.
Is there any way for a self contained example.
--
What|Removed |Added
--
101 - 200 of 216 matches
Mail list logo
