http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52441
Oleg Endo <olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed| |2012-03-01
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Oleg Endo <olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-03-01 22:13:23
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
>
> I don't know any historical reason but x86 uses that double sign/zero
> extension too. It wouldn't be a safe ABI change. There can exist hand
> written functions depending that behavior. It's too late to change
> the default behavior, I think. Of course, you can add a new -m option
> or function attribute changing it, though it shouldn't be default for
> non Renesas ABI.
Right, thanks! I haven't thought of the hand-written asm code scenario. This
can turn into a funny problem indeed.
I'll go the option way, then.
