http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57631
--- Comment #12 from pebbles at riseup dot net ---
(In reply to Georg-Johann Lay from comment #10)
> I can have a look at it, but it might take a month or so until I get back to
> this issue.
>
> If I understand correctly, bottom line
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57631
pebbles at riseup dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57631
--- Comment #8 from pebbles at riseup dot net ---
(In reply to Georg-Johann Lay from comment #7)
> (In reply to pebbles from comment #6)
>
> > This seems like a very small patch that makes GCC more extendable and
> > accur
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57631
--- Comment #6 from pebbles at riseup dot net ---
You seem to be speaking from an assumption that this warning code should not
change. Is there a reason for not adding this small patch, which makes gcc
more extendable and accurate?
(In reply to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57631
--- Comment #4 from pebbles at riseup dot net ---
(In reply to Georg-Johann Lay from comment #3)
> Would you explain what you are trying to achieve?
For one thing, I'm coding in C++, so the handlers may be mangled to the wrong
symbols
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: pebbles at riseup dot net
This simple example fails to compile with g++ development sources.
===
int i;
constexpr int
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57631
--- Comment #2 from pebbles at riseup dot net ---
Created attachment 30314
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30314&action=edit
avr.c: avr_set_current_function: 'name' uses assembler name if set
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57631
--- Comment #1 from pebbles at riseup dot net ---
Here is a more complete test:
// test.c ...
__attribute__((signal,used))
void __vector_1() { asm(""); } // should not trigger warning, should be placed
in __vectors
__attribute__((s
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: pebbles at riseup dot net
Hi,
Currently AVR interrupts do not mix well with asm labels, as:
// test.c ...
__attribute__((signal,used))
void __vector_1() { asm(""); }
__attribute__((signal,used))
void p
