* Brendan O'Dea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-06-06 19:31]:
> Martin, I can however make this a Debian-specific change for the short
> term if this bug is a blocker for switching gcc-defaults to 4.1 .
Oh, no, don't worry. Our latest 4.1 package has reverted this change.
Anyway, feel free to close thi
On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 05:31:09PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
>Note that I specifically did not say the code is invalid, but only
>questionable because of desired semantics. The "storage-class" for
>function parameters is specified by the ABI in effect, so any additional
>storage-class specifi
On Mon, 5 Jun 2006, Brendan O'Dea wrote:
> Re: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27884
>
> Hi Richard,
>
> Could you please expand on your comment:
>
> "It's certainly a questionable use of 'register'. What is the
>expected effect of this parameter declaration from perls point
Re: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27884
Hi Richard,
Could you please expand on your comment:
"It's certainly a questionable use of 'register'. What is the
expected effect of this parameter declaration from perls point of
view?"
My copy of an [admittedly old C9X standard]
4 matches
Mail list logo
