Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: gnubg bug? Baseline Information

[Christian Anthon]

Thx guys,

I have reversed the code in a cleaned up version and added the volatile keyword.

Christian.

On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 10:45 PM, Michael Petch<address@hidden> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 08/08/09 2:41 PM, "Michael Petch" <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>>
>> Didn't work for me either. Looking at the generated assembler it is clear
>> one of the memory accesses of pm gets optimized away in the loop. The
>> volatile keyword on pm works, and I believe is the best solution as well.
>>
>
> If this works for others, can I recommend a Windows release get generated as
> well. Bgonliners (Keene specifically) were the first to believe there may be
> an issue, and would be nice to get them a resolution.
>
> Michael
>
>
>