Re: Bignum support still broken on powerpc (ping: Jerry James)
- First Post
- Replies
- Stats
-
Go to
- ----- 2024 -----
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2023 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2022 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2021 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2020 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2019 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2018 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2017 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2016 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2015 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2014 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2013 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2012 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2011 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2010 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2009 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2008 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2007 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2006 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2005 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2004 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2003 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2002 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2001 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2000 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 1999 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 1998 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
Mon, 10 Apr 2006 (16:35 -0600 UTC) Jerry James wrote:
robert delius royar <xemacs(a)frinabulax.org> wrote:
> OK, I simply removed the 'if (__GMP_ULONG_MAX <= GMP_NUMB_MASK)' from
line
> 1595 of gmp.h. That stopped the warnings. Now, my loadup/dump fails with the
> same type error
> Requiring disp-table.el...*** Error in XEmacs initialization
> (wrong-type-argument integer-or-char-p 225)
I wonder if you are triggering a similar bug to the icc bug that bit me.
Let's see. I am attaching the test case I sent Intel a couple of years
ago. You'll have to edit the Makefile a bit, but try it out and see if
the test program reports that you are getting bignum results. You
shouldn't be.
I mistyped in my last reply. I did NOT see "a bignum" in the output,
and I should NOT have. So it looks like the problem is something to do
with my --enable-union-type setting. On the G5, if I remove that, I get
a working bignum-enabled XEmacs. I haven't tried again on my G4, but
the compilation I tried last summer (gcc4.00) failed with any
configuration using bignum. The G5 uses gcc4.01, which warns infewer
places and fails less often than did gcc4.00.
--
Dr. Robert Delius Royar Associate Professor of English
Morehead State University Morehead, Kentucky
Jerry James
Saturday, 15 April
Sat, 15 Apr
9:22 p.m.
New subject: Bignum support still broken on powerpc (ping: Jerry James)
robert delius royar <xemacs(a)frinabulax.org> wrote:
I mistyped in my last reply. I did NOT see "a bignum" in
the output, and I
should NOT have. So it looks like the problem is something to do with my
--enable-union-type setting. On the G5, if I remove that, I get a working
bignum-enabled XEmacs. I haven't tried again on my G4, but the compilation I
tried last summer (gcc4.00) failed with any configuration using bignum. The
G5 uses gcc4.01, which warns infewer places and fails less often than did
gcc4.00.
Yes, the union type setting seems to be quite good at triggering
compiler bugs. Can I take it then that we have resolved the issue, at
least as far as your G5 is concerned? Is there any possibility of
upgrading the compiler on the G4?
Regards,
--
Jerry James, Assistant Professor james(a)xemacs.org
Computer Science Department http://www.cs.usu.edu/~jerry/
Utah State University
6586
days inactive
6590
days old
1 comments
2 participants
tags (0)
participants (2)
-
Jerry James -
robert delius royar