|What's wrong with alloca() ? firstname.lastname@example.org (1991-12-19)|
|Re: What's wrong with alloca() in gcc???? email@example.com (1991-12-31)|
|Re: What's wrong with alloca() in gcc???? firstname.lastname@example.org (1991-12-31)|
|Re: What's wrong with alloca() in gcc???? angular!jas@Sun.COM (1992-01-01)|
|Re: What's wrong with alloca() in gcc???? email@example.com (1992-01-02)|
|Date:||Tue, 31 Dec 91 13:36:24 MST|
firstname.lastname@example.org (Michael O'Dell) writes:
At least at one time, the dynamic array stuff in gcc was very broken
in that if you have
sizeof(foo) returned sizeof(int).
this has been fixed as of version 1.40
> cat x.c
This is so wrong as to be beyond belief.
With bugs and computers, it is hard to find something beyond belief.
It certainly was a relatively straightforward bug to introduce, and it
probably wasn't all that hard to fix. Certainly the existence of this
bug is not an indication that gcc is not a good compiler. In fact, it
is an excellent compiler. And the price is very hard to beat.
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.