void pig(void) __attribute__ ((long_call));
void pig(void)
{
}
Yes, that's the way it's currently coded.
The problem, it seems to me, is that we want to fault:
void pig(void) __attribute__ ((long_call));
...
void pig(void);
and
void pig(void);
...
void pig(void) __attribute__((long_call));
both of which would be potentially problematical (which do we believe?)
from the case that you have. AFAICT there is nothing on the types
passed into the back-end to distinguish a declaration from a definition
in this context.
The cases you mention are two declarations right? My example had the attribute on the
declaration and not on the definition just like with the other attribute types.
I suppose your explanation went way over my head, since I still don't understand what is
different with the long-call attribute that the same approach which works with other
function attributes yields an error in this case.
Is there anything tricky that prevents an easy implementation?
thanks
Jani
