On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 6:10 AM, grischka <gris...@gmx.de> wrote: > Thomas Preud'homme wrote: > >> Le mardi 24 janvier 2012 01:11:08, Daniel Glöckner a écrit : >> >>> On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 11:30:54AM +0100, Thomas Preud'homme wrote: >>> >>>> Shouldn't the same fix (Cf attached file) be applied for x86-64? >>>> >>> Yes you are right, x86-64 needs fixing as well. >>> >>> As I'm not sure about the answer I didn't dare to commit the change. >>>> >>> It needs to be modified a little, as load gets called with registers >>> not covered in reg_classes. >>> >> I hope I understand what you meant well. Does this new patch fix the >> problem? >> > > I think it can't hurt here to quote this one: > > "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. > Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, > by definition, not smart enough to debug it." -- Brian Kernighan >
Ha! I've never seen this! Wonderful! This will be my new email signature. > Interpreted version: Before you even start to write some patch, make > sure you have a test to prove its correctness. > > --- grischka > > > ______________________________**_________________ > Tinycc-devel mailing list > Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org > https://lists.nongnu.org/**mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel<https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel> > David
_______________________________________________ Tinycc-devel mailing list Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
