| From: | Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu (Thomas G(dot) Lockhart) |
| Cc: | oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] problem compiling with egcs 1.1.1 |
| Date: | 1998-12-09 15:48:40 |
| Message-ID: | 199812091548.KAA11227@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > gcc version egcs-2.91.57 19980901 (egcs-1.1 release) has no problem
> > to compile 6.4, and 1.1.1 release also compiles 6.4 fine.
> > Today I installed 1.1.1 and recompile 6.4 - no problem !
> > Probably egcs people fixed the problem.
>
> What optimization level do you use? Do you find that the newer version
> of egcs does a good job with floating point rounding, or are the
> regression tests filled with ".999999" results? I much preferred the
> gcc-2.7.x behavior wrt graceful rounding, and hope that at some point
> egcs will also have it...
Why do people use egcs? It looks like an experimental version of gcc2,
and I am not big on experimental compilers. I want something that
works, 100% of the time.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Oleg Broytmann | 1998-12-09 15:48:47 | Re: [HACKERS] Date/time on glibc2 linux |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 1998-12-09 15:47:08 | Re: AW: [HACKERS] isnull() or is it?t |