X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mailnull set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f Message-ID: <3C489F4F.5BB1D77@netstep.net> From: Rodeo Red X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: My program produces nonsense with 3.0.3 References: <3C483E73 DOT 54F9B484 AT netstep DOT net> <3C485969 DOT A862A251 AT netstep DOT net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 40 Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 22:13:14 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.232.135.150 X-Complaints-To: Abuse Role , We Care X-Trace: newshog.newsread.com 1011391994 205.232.135.150 (Fri, 18 Jan 2002 17:13:14 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 17:13:14 EST Organization: Crossroads Systems (netstep.net) To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Hans-Bernhard Broeker wrote: > > Rodeo Red wrote: > > > The compiler took twice as long, the the program it produced was twice > > as big, and when I ran my program, it took 50% longer and turned the > > begining of the web pages into gibberish. (A repeating pattern which, > > strangly had the word java in it.) > > This could all be caused by changes in GCC 3 to get it closer to ANSI > C++ compliance. So does that mean its not really a djgpp problem? (I'm still trying to understand the difference) >Hard, if not impossible to tell, without seeing the > source code and the exact kind of misbehaviour. > Short web pages are not effected. In long pages it turns the first six hundred lines into one line of a repeating pattern: tes ÿÿÿÿ @ @ tes ÿÿÿÿ @ @ tes ÿÿÿÿ @ It also changes the file so my editor thinks its a hex file. The good version produced by GCC-2.95.2 was 514 kb This bad version produced by 3.0.3 has 926 kb and took twice as long to compile If anyones interested, this page links to the code and a download with the code and the offending executable: http://reenie.org/data/badindenter/index.htm I'm not urgently asking for help or anything like that, I just thought it might help someone out there track down the bugs in 3.0.3. GCC-2.95.2 works fine for my purposes, but I'm glad someones trying to make it more compliant. -red