Re: fixes for type-punning warnings in GCC 4.1

Alexandre Oliva
2006-02-10T00:33:01Z

On Feb 8, 2006, Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 12:48:11AM -0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> On Jan 22, 2006, Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org> wrote:
>>
>> > The output is always a DOUBLEST. I don't know of any reason why we
>> > should enable HAVE_LONG_DOUBLE if we can't printf and scanf them; would
>> > this be simpler in that case? Don't make DOUBLEST something we can't
>> > scan or print.
>>
>> Sounds good to me. Ok to install?

> Well, it's not right as-is; you need to look at the other uses of
> HAVE_LONG_DOUBLE.

Did. The other uses of HAVE_LONG_DOUBLE are correct, since they do
not assume DOUBLEST is long double and they make no attempts at
printing long doubles directly.

> Would you mind terribly fixing that, adding a changelog, and leaving
> out the tui-data change for now?

gdb won't build without the tui-data change. What's wrong with adding
the temporary fix now, such that it builds, until someone with a
better understanding can go ahead and re-engineer the data structure
correctly?

> Anything that needs an explanatory paragraph it's probably worth
> seeing how hard the interface fix is; if you don't have time, I'll
> do it.

Thanks,

--
Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Secretary for FSF Latin America http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}