bunnell@henry (Tim Bunnell) (09/21/89)
Recently I posted an example of a small program that fails to compile correctly on my AT-clone computer using the stock Minix 1.2 compiler. The problem is one of ignoring static declarations embedded in code blocks. Thanks to a response from Mark Becker it has become fairly clear that the bug is indeed a devious one. Mark's compiler components are identical to mine in size and crc, yet the example program I sent compiles correctly on his machine. By rummaging thru the output of the various compiler passes I've become convinced that cem is at fault -- that program seems to be able to produce different output on different machines. There is something about some AT clones that confuses cem. This leads to a plea for the next release of the PC compiler: could machine dependencies in the compiler be controlled, or at least overridden by command line switches? Tim Bunnell <bunnell@henry.asel.udel.edu>