Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: gnubg bug? Baseline Information

[Michael Petch]

On 08/08/09 2:41 PM, "Michael Petch" <address@hidden> wrote:

> 
> Didn't work for me either. Looking at the generated assembler it is clear
> one of the memory accesses of pm gets optimized away in the loop. The
> volatile keyword on pm works, and I believe is the best solution as well.
> 

If this works for others, can I recommend a Windows release get generated as
well. Bgonliners (Keene specifically) were the first to believe there may be
an issue, and would be nice to get them a resolution.

Michael