| ??? 11/02/09 13:45 Read: times |
#170342 - Disable compiler optimizations. Responding to: ???'s previous message |
So when debugging, you should not expect to be able to view the current contents of a variable after the last time the variable was used.<p>
Reducing or disabling compiler optimizations should keep the variable visiable. Of course, you usually don't want to ship unoptimized code, but if you want to see exactly what happens, turn down those optimization settings. If the end result of the same snippet of code is different when compiled optimized and unoptimized, then you've probably found a compiler bug. |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| Odd calculation result... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Hmm. Even odder. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| what is the definition... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Compiler reuses registers and memory cells | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Ah. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Disable compiler optimizations. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Compiler bug? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Maturity of compilers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| the primary suspect should always be the end user. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| "innovation" as alternative name for bug | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| C51 also does that! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| C51 has smart linker | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I found a some genuine compiler bugs. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Broken code in RTL is the worst | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Thanks! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Defs | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| poor choice of names | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Good data types are really critical | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I'm an idiot. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| informative! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| "Answer is wrong" | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Which one would you prefer?? | 01/01/70 00:00 |