Hello Christoph,
Please use
int G__optimizemode(int optlevel);
This can be used both from interpreter and
in compiled code(need G__ci.h to be included).
Thank you
Masaharu Goto
>Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2001 16:36:48 +0300
>From: Christoph Bugel <chris@tti-telecom.com>
>To: Masaharu Goto <MXJ02154@nifty.ne.jp>
>Cc: roottalk@pcroot.cern.ch, rootdev@pcroot.cern.ch
>Subject: Re: [ROOT] RE:CINT: extra destructor called
>
>
>Thank you for the tip :)
>I activated the optimization 0 like this:
>
>G__init_cint("cint -O0");
>G__loadfile("test.cc");
>G__calc("func();");
>
>and it fixed the problem.
>Is it possible to turn this option on at a later time (not during
G__init_cint)
>with something like G__process_cmd, or similar? (I think with G__calc and
>G__exec_text I can use only C++ syntax, not commands)
>
>Thanks,
>Christoph
>
>
>On Wed 2001-08-08, Masaharu Goto wrote:
>> Hello Christoph,
>>
>> Thank you for reporting this problem.
>> It turned out that this is a tricky one. I need time to
>> think about this. Meanwhile, a workaround is to use optimization
>> level 0 '.O0' to turn off bytecode compilation.
>>
>> Thank you
>> Masaharu Goto
>>
>>
>> >Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 16:02:58 +0300
>> >From: Christoph Bugel <chris@tti-telecom.com>
>> >To: roottalk@pcroot.cern.ch, rootdev@pcroot.cern.ch
>> >Subject: CINT: extra destructor called
>> >
>> >Hi!
>> >I found a bug in cint, causing it to call a destructor where it
>> >shouldnt. For example, the code below will produce this output:
>> >
>> >DTOR
>> >CTOR
>> >DTOR
>> >
>> >This was tested with cint-5.15.07.
>> >BTW, when 'i' is initialized to 3, the output will be 'DTOR' which is
>> >also wrong. If 'i' is initialized to 0 it works ok. (CTOR, DTOR).
>> >Thanks!
>> >
>> >here is the code:
>> >
>> >/////////////////////////////////////
>> >
>> >class X
>> >{
>> > public:
>> > X(){ printf("CTOR\n"); }
>> > ~X(){ printf("DTOR\n"); }
>> >};
>> >void bug()
>> >{
>> > int i=0;
>> > while(i<5)
>> > {
>> > if(i==1)
>> > {
>> > X x1;
>> > }
>> > i = i + 1;
>> > }
>> >}
>> >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 01 2002 - 17:50:56 MET