On Thursday 14 November 2013 19:25:25 Mark H Weaver wrote: > When reporting bugs, please tell us what version of Guile you're > using. > Oops, I should have known better. William S. Fulton (from the Swig project), filled in the details in message #8.
> This is fixed in Guile 2.0.9. The bug came into existence when clang > started optimizing out overflow checks, on the theory that if a signed > integer overflow occurs then the behavior is unspecified and thus the > compiler can do whatever it likes. > As noted by William, the bug appears in 1.8. Is there any chance to get this fix backported to that branch ? Or has support for 1.8 stopped completely in the meantime ? Thanks, Geert
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
