http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59863
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com <joseph at codesourcery dot com> --- On Fri, 17 Jan 2014, sam at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > Is there anything in the C standard preventing a const array declared in a > function from being put in .rodata or are those missed optimizations? If the object address can escape and the function can be called recursively, this would violate the requirement for distinct objects to have distinct addresses. (See discussion on comp.std.c, "uniqueness of automatic objects", Nov 2008; I'm not sure if there was a corresponding GCC bug report / fix.)
