Re: [avr-gcc-list] GCC 3.0 thread

[Denis Chertykov]

address@hidden (J Wunsch) writes:

> >> But what about the internal consistency compilation problems i
> >> mentioned?  Have they been fixed meanwhile?
> > 
> > You don't point to any real bug.
> 
> Hmm, maybe.  The old compiler used
> 
> __tmp_reg__ = r0
> 
> while the new one uses
> 
> __tmp_reg__ = 0
> 
> Does that mean the current version of the assembler understands the
> latter as well as the former as a valid register naming?

Current avr-as understands `__tmp_reg__ = 0' and
(for example) `mov __tmp_reg__, r29'.

> (Actually, there was a bug in my report, regarding the number of
> parameters to REGISTER_MOVE_COST() being inconsistent between the
> machine-dependent .h files and their usage in the machine-independent
> ..c files.  But that might have been a temporary one of that particular
> version.)

Show me a code examples and GCC version.

> >> I can't download the full > 10 GB of gcc source code each day, just in
> >> order to check whether it's fixed now.
> > 
> > Use CVS. It's really nice.
> 
> Well, i know CVS and know it's nice:), we've been using at for FreeBSD
> since 1993...  But i don't want to become a gcc developer, and it's
> not all that practical for daily work (in particular not when used as
> remote CVS).  I'll give it another try by using one of the snapshot
> tarballs for binutils.

Are you sure than you use a latest binutils (not a 2.10 branch).

Denis.