kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Chris Pavlina <pavlina.chris@xxxxxxxxx>]

A part of me wants to say "just being in the KiCad source tree should do
that". But that's a bit mean, isn't it ^-^

Maybe paste an excerpt from your rant in a comment :D

On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 06:55:47PM -0400, Wayne Stambaugh wrote:
> Thanks Simon.  Chris already tested this.  I just haven't got around to
> merging the patch.  One positive thing about leaving this code in place
> is it should raise a red flag to anyone who looks at it.  Removing this
> code is going to hide the true ugliness that lies underneath it.
> 
> Wayne
> 
> On 9/28/2016 6:44 PM, Simon Richter wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On 28.09.2016 17:57, Wayne Stambaugh wrote:
> > 
> >> I didn't test what the compiler generated but I suspected that was the
> >> case from warning message. If that's the case then I will apply the
> >> patch but it does mask the underlying issue which could fail spectacularly.
> > 
> > That is what happens:
> > 
> > #include <exception>
> > 
> > void foo(int &i)
> > {
> >         if(&i == 0)
> >                 std::terminate();
> > }
> > 
> > $ g++ -O2 -c tt.cpp
> > 
> > 0000000000000000 <foo(int&)>:
> >    0:   f3 c3                   repz retq
> > 
> > So the test is indeed optimized out.
> > 
> >    Simon
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> > Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> > More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> > 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp