misha@sunnie.Huji.AC.IL (Michael Pak) (09/26/89)
Hi, there.
I have recently discovered a 'gcc' compiler on our system.
When I began using it, it appeared that the code runs now much faster
than the one produced by the standard 'cc'. But a while ago,
somebody told me to stay away from this 'gcc', since it has quite
a few serious bugs in producing code. He said, that it sometimes
produces incorrect code, and the program does things it was not
supposed to do.
Since I have never encountered any bugs whatsoever (and I use it very
extensively) I would like to ask whether you have encountered any bugs,
and if you did, I would appreciate if you can send me their description.
And also, if you have any benchmark results, I would like
to see them very much.
Thanks.jimp@asterix.UUCP (Jim Patterson) (09/28/89)
In article <506@shuldig.Huji.Ac.IL> misha%shum.huji.ac.il@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU writes: > I have recently discovered a 'gcc' compiler on our system. >When I began using it, it appeared that the code runs now much faster >than the one produced by the standard 'cc'. ... >I would like to ask whether you have encountered any bugs, We tried out gcc on our system (Sun 3's), and never encountered what could be called a 'bug'. (If you have different hardware, this experience may not relate). We did encounter a few differences between calling conventions of gcc and those of Sun's compiler. These are relevant only if you mix the two languages. The differences that we encountered (there are likely others) are: - A function declared as returning float actually returns a float with gcc. cc promotes the float to double. Both are consistent with the ANSI draft standard. The only time this causes problems are: if an external reference declares a function float but the declaration is actually double (works with cc, not with gcc); or the function is declared float, and the implementation is compiled with cc but the caller compiles with gcc. - Struct alignments. gcc will allocate a struct containing a single byte (or 8 bits or less of bit-fields) to be 1 byte long. cc allocates a minimum of 2 bytes for any struct. -- Jim Patterson Cognos Incorporated UUCP:decvax!utzoo!dciem!nrcaer!cognos!jimp P.O. BOX 9707 PHONE:(613)738-1440 3755 Riverside Drive Ottawa, Ont K1G 3Z4
davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.COM (Wm E Davidsen Jr) (09/29/89)
Before using gcc your should read the license. If you compile and link using their library you must make the source of your program available to the public for three years. That may not be desirable in all cases. gcc is not bug free, but it is about as clean as most commercial compilers. It has *deferent* bugs, not *more* bugs. -- bill davidsen (davidsen@crdos1.crd.GE.COM -or- uunet!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen) "The world is filled with fools. They blindly follow their so-called 'reason' in the face of the church and common sense. Any fool can see that the world is flat!" - anon
fischer@iesd.auc.dk (Lars P. Fischer) (10/08/89)
In article <7158@asterix.UUCP> jimp@asterix.UUCP (Jim Patterson) writes: >We tried out gcc on our system (Sun 3's), and never encountered what >could be called a 'bug'. >.. >The differences that we encountered (there are likely others) are: >... AND of course: - better code generated (program runs faster). - you don't have to write "register int x' all over the place. GCC does register allocation. - ANSI compliance. You can do 'void f(int x){..}'. - you have the source. GCC is really a very good product. As is all GNUware. /Lars -- Copyright 1989 Lars Fischer; you can redistribute only if your recipients can. Lars Fischer, fischer@iesd.auc.dk, {...}!mcvax!iesd!fischer Department of Computer Science, University of Aalborg, DENMARK. "That makes 100 errors; please try again" --TeX
fischer@iesd.auc.dk (Lars P. Fischer) (10/08/89)
In article <631@crdos1.crd.ge.COM> davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.COM (Wm E Davidsen Jr) writes: > Before using gcc your should read the license. If you compile and link >using their library you must make the source of your program available >to the public for three years. Not so. Read the GNU Public License. Note that 'gnulib.c' (the runtime system) is *not* copyrighted. If you compile with gcc, and link with your systems 'ld' (the default) there is no problem. When the GNU version of libc.a becomes available, all programs linked with it will have to distributed as GNUware, *if* they are distributed at all. You can of course still use your own version of libc.a if you like. > gcc is not bug free, but it is about as clean as most commercial >compilers. It has *deferent* bugs, not *more* bugs. Actually, it has *fewer* bugs that most commercial compilers. /Lars -- Copyright 1989 Lars Fischer; you can redistribute only if your recipients can. Lars Fischer, fischer@iesd.auc.dk, {...}!mcvax!iesd!fischer Department of Computer Science, University of Aalborg, DENMARK. "That makes 100 errors; please try again" --TeX
jv@mh.nl (Johan Vromans) (10/09/89)
In article <FISCHER.89Oct7211012@dirac.iesd.auc.dk> fischer@iesd.auc.dk (Lars P. Fischer) writes: > > gcc is not bug free, but it is about as clean as most commercial > >compilers. It has *deferent* bugs, not *more* bugs. > > Actually, it has *fewer* bugs that most commercial compilers. One of the reasons there is misconception about the number of bugs in the gcc compiler, is because there is a wide platform (the USENET) they are discussed on. Each time I get a new cc from one of my vendors, there are tens to houndreds of errors corrected. Almost all of these errors I did not know that they existed at all. With gcc we *KNOW* about most of the errors. That's the difference. Johan -- Johan Vromans jv@mh.nl via internet backbones Multihouse Automatisering bv uucp: ..!{uunet,hp4nl}!mh.nl!jv Doesburgweg 7, 2803 PL Gouda, The Netherlands phone/fax: +31 1820 62944/62500 ------------------------ "Arms are made for hugging" -------------------------
fischer@iesd.auc.dk (Lars P. Fischer) (10/09/89)
In article <JV.89Oct8125014@mhres.mh.nl> jv@mh.nl (Johan Vromans) writes: >One of the reasons there is misconception about the number of bugs in >the gcc compiler, is because there is a wide platform (the USENET) >they are discussed on. Each time I get a new cc from one of my >vendors, there are tens to houndreds of errors corrected. Almost all >of these errors I did not know that they existed at all. With gcc we >*KNOW* about most of the errors. That's the difference. If you want to now about errors in your compiler, try looking up "known bugs" in the manual. Most likely, there'll be lots of 'em. With GNU, when you report a bug, it gets fixed. With most (other) vendor, it gets added to the "know bugs" list (new releases of GNUware nearly always have the words "this release corrects all know bugs.." somewhere). GNUware--high performance software you can trust :-). /Lars -- Copyright 1989 Lars Fischer; you can redistribute only if your recipients can. Lars Fischer, fischer@iesd.auc.dk, {...}!mcvax!iesd!fischer Department of Computer Science, University of Aalborg, DENMARK. "That makes 100 errors; please try again" --TeX