https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25521
--- Comment #12 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Sam James :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0ac0e640a7f86ba45b7e13ed018826177197f3ce
commit r15-2370-g0ac0e640a7f86ba45b7e13ed018826177197f3ce
Author: Sam James
Date: Sat Jul 2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25521
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25521
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jose E. Marchesi :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a0aafbc324aa90421f0ce99c6f5bbf64ed163da6
commit r13-2952-ga0aafbc324aa90421f0ce99c6f5bbf64ed163da6
Author: Jose E. Marchesi
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25521
--- Comment #9 from Jose E. Marchesi ---
So I got feedback from the clang/llvm folks on this.
As you can see in [1] they asked the WG14 reflectors about the footnote 135 in
the C18 spec and their conclusion is that there is no normative objectio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25521
--- Comment #8 from Jose E. Marchesi ---
After a little discussion in IRC I filed this LLVM bug:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/56468
Regarding the ICE described by Ulrich, I cannot reproduce it using:
bpf-unknown-none-gcc (GCC) 13.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25521
--- Comment #7 from Jose E. Marchesi ---
If, as a workaround, I try to use a `section' attribute, like in:
__attribute__((section(".rodata"))) volatile const int lala = 0;
I don't get an ICE, but a section with write permissions:
.section
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25521
Jose E. Marchesi changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jose.marchesi at oracle dot com
--- C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25521
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||etienne_lorrain at yahoo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25521
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
--- Comment #3 from gdr at integrable-solutions dot net 2005-12-21 19:54
---
Subject: Re: change semantics of const volatile variables
"drepper at redhat dot com" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| __attribute((section(".rodata.cst8"))). This will cause gcc to fail with an
| ICE.
That i
--- Comment #2 from drepper at redhat dot com 2005-12-21 19:38 ---
Using gcc's section attributes won't fully work either.
Using __attribute((section(".rodata"))) is OK in the compiler, although the
assembler (correctly) complaints. But what is really needed is
__attribute((section(".
--- Comment #1 from gdr at integrable-solutions dot net 2005-12-21 19:17
---
Subject: Re: New: change semantics of const volatile variables
"drepper at redhat dot com" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| In math code we often have to make sure the compiler does not fold operations
| at co
12 matches
Mail list logo
