: Re: [MPlayer-dev-eng] [PATCH] vf_spp: fix compiler-error and/or runtime crash

[Martin Simmons]

>>>>> On Mon, 3 Jan 2005 00:34:24 +0100, "Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski" <dominik at rangers.eu.org> said:

> On Sunday, 02 January 2004 at 23:44, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > Hi
> > 
> > On Sunday 02 January 2005 23:18, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> > > On Sunday, 02 January 2004 at 17:10, D Richard Felker III wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 11:57:47AM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > > > > but OTOH, as the gcc developers dont consider things like this a bug
> > > > > anymore (see my new sig ...) iam not sure how we should deal with such
> > > > > things in the future
> > > > >
> > > > > [...]
> > > > > --
> > > > > Michael
> > > > >
> > > > > "In any case, just because code is syntactically "valid" GNU C doesn't
> > > > > mean gcc can always compile it." -- justification to close a gcc bug
> > > >
> > > > rotfl!!!
> > > > i love it! :))
> > >
> > > Yeah, well, I don't believe everything I hear until I can verify it. And I
> > > can't find this particular quote in any web archive, so please either post
> > > a link or stop spreading FUD.
> > 
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11203

> Thank you. This is outrageous, even though it's only a comment from one
> person. Especially when others show this is fixable. I wish this Steven
> character could at least say "OK, we've screwed up, but we won't fix it in
> 3.x". That'd be fair enough. But no, he has to go into the old "it's your
> fault, stupid luser" routine. *sigh*

He effectively does say that when he mentions GCC 4.0 or did you want
grovelling?  The quote about "syntactically valid" has been taken wildly out
of context, because there are lots of syntactically valid but stupid asm
fragments that will break.  They are like mencoder options :-).

The OP mentioned "corrupted double linked list (or sth. like that ;-)" which
doesn't look like the same problem as gcc bug 11203 anyway.

__Martin