[Aranym-user] GNU/GCC 3.3.6 SDK for miniPack
oak at helsinkinet.fi
Mon Mar 24 23:02:41 CET 2014
On maanantai 24 maaliskuu 2014, Francois LE COAT wrote:
> GNU/GCC 3.x is not better or worse than GNU/GCC 4.x ... It's just
> different way of writing computer's languages. I would say that
> 3.x is better if you write plain C language, and 4.x for C++ extension.
> That's a matter of generations of developers ... I started writing
> Kernighan and Ritchie C language, than I moved to pure ANSI C. The
> transition to C++ for me is not natural, at all. Many warnings in
> GNU/GCC 3.x became errors in 4.x. I can't cope with this 4.x style.
What kind of "warnings become errors"?
> The problem, when I build Eureka 2.12 with GNU/GCC 4.x, is that
> it behaves completely wrong. Eureka 2.12 being a large piece of
> C language, I can't tell you why, and I have no time to spend on it.
What optimization options you're using?
The higher optimization options you use, the more correct
your code needs to be. Lower optimization levels are more
forgiving of programming errors, and compiler's stricter
interpretation of C specifications.
For example, you might want to try build with "-fno-strict-aliasing".
(Aliasing optimizations are enabled in GCC by -O2.)
> So, I prefer building Eureka 2.12 with GNU/GCC 3.3.6. Perhaps it
> could be useful for other developers, who would like to build old code.
> It's a pity we can't access to GNU/GCC 3.3.6 cross-compiler, because
> I would really enjoy using it, better than native, that is not so bad.
More information about the cz-bobek-lists-aranym-user