https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101726
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Stefan Kneifel from comment #4) > Yes, but a programmer might choose to implement target clones for a shared > library using another language, e.g. hand-optimized assembler code (this was > the actual problem I had). Ah, I hadn't thought about such a use case. > Forbidding target_clone declarations would make that solution impossible, > which should IMHO not be the case. To my opinion, the original solution (if > the target_clone function declaration is public, then it should be regarded > as public) is the most consequent one. All right, I'm going to send such a patch.
