https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37949
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
This one is a dup of bug 4131 and not PR 24928. Those 2 are related but one is
easier to implement than the other.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 4131 ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37949
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|SUSPENDED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37949
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |SUSPENDED
--- Comment #6 from Eric Galla
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37949
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37949
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu.org |
--- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini 2012-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37949
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 f
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-17 09:18 ---
This would be "inlining" of static-initialization-and-destruction functions
if they get optimized to return a constant initializer.
It's not easy to do as they cannot be easily removed late in the compilation.
Of c
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-16 22:05 ---
Confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCON
