Thank you very much for your efforts. You helped me a lot.
> However, the gcc 3.x builds did trigger lots of valgrind errors (over
> ten million!); so there's definitely serious problems with the code
> (just nothing that causes a fatal crash).
I knew about the errors but I didn't talk about it,
Jonas Stahl wrote:
>> Try running the application under valgrind or some other memory debugger.
>> If possible also try slightly different releases of gcc (4.1.1 or 4.2);
>> there's an outside chance that it's a bug in gcc.
>
> Thanks. I think this isolated the fault a bit more.
> I tried debuggin
El jue, 15-11-2007 a las 21:30 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
> I will stick my neck out and say `YYLEX' is a macro, because I think I
> was
> overly cautious before. I don't know anything else it could be.
> (Just my
> opinion, but I loathe the term "method". Why they had to invent a new
>
>> Try running the application under valgrind or some other memory
>> debugger.
>> If possible also try slightly different releases of gcc (4.1.1 or 4.2);
>> there's an outside chance that it's a bug in gcc.
>
> Thanks. I think this isolated the fault a bit more.
> I tried debugging under valgrind.
> Try running the application under valgrind or some other memory debugger.
> If possible also try slightly different releases of gcc (4.1.1 or 4.2);
> there's an outside chance that it's a bug in gcc.
Thanks. I think this isolated the fault a bit more.
I tried debugging under valgrind. The result
