minimal requirements for build C compiler?

[Andre]

Mike Frysinger <vapier at gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Friday 26 May 2006 08:31, Andre wrote:
> > "You should upgrade to a later version" is of course the standard
> > argument for dropping support for older tools. It doesn't change
> > the fact that 3.4.4 is an offical release and 'bleeding edge' not
> > much more than a year ago - which for most projects would be
> > reason enough to try to support it.
> 
> your rant here is really pretty weak
> 
> we're not telling you your compiler is outdated, we're telling you
> you're using a broken compiler

If 'broken' is defined as 'has known bugs' then I have no argument
that gcc 3.4.x for ARM is broken (although I would disagree that this
is the normal definition...).

That isn't really the point though.

The point is that writing code which relies on undocumented behaviour
within an optimisation pass of the compiler is/was risky and this
time you lost. Please just admit it, shrug it off and move on ;-)

Andre
--


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com