> From: Keith Marshall <keith****@users*****> > Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2019 23:16:22 +0000 > > I've now repeated my own analysis, with every version of mingw32-gcc > that I still have to hand; the list comprises: > > GCC-3.4.5 > GCC-4.8.2 > GCC-4.9.3 > GCC-5.3.0 > GCC-6.3.0 > GCC-7.3.0 > GCC-8.2.0 > > It turns out that Bruno's claim may be valid, in the particular case of > GCC-3.4.5 alone; in every other case, his claim is bogus. As every > version of mingwrt which has been published, since the publication of > mingw32-gcc-4.8.2, (and possibly earlier mingw32-gcc-4.x releases), is > incompatible with mingw32-gcc-3.4.5 anyway, any argument that we must > not adopt the in-line expansion of alloca() seems tenuous at best. Thanks for looking into this. > > Please help me to revive that discussion, as it seems to have > > stalled, and my recent ping didn't help. > > I can certainly post a rebuttal of Bruno's bogus claim; is the gnulib > list open to non-subscriber postings? It is, although your message might wait a bit to be approved by the moderators. I post there without being a subscriber. > I'd still welcome opinions from other MinGW users, regarding the > status quo of our current mingwrt implementation. Seconded.
Fork