--- Comment #8 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 22:31
---
Thanks, Steven.
So, one year later, ...
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #7 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 19:54 ---
Created an attachment (id=20509)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20509&action=view)
preprocessed test case, copied from comment #0
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39883
--- Comment #6 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 19:41
---
> Preprocessed source is embedded in the original submission.
Yes, that's precisely why I asked to attach it instead.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39883
--- Comment #5 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE 2010-04-28
19:30 ---
Subject: Re: preprocessor fails with myassertion
>> Maybe Eric has a sparcv9 compiler around and can easily check this?
>
> I only have 4.3.5, 4.5.1 and 4.6.0 compilers for sparc64-sun-solaris2.x at the
>
--- Comment #4 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 18:46
---
> I'll try to go through the Solaris bugs in the near future, but have
> concentrated on getting the 4.5 release in shape until now.
I totally missed it as well...
> Maybe Eric has a sparcv9 compiler around and
--- Comment #3 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE 2010-04-28
18:00 ---
Subject: Re: preprocessor fails with myassertion
> --- Comment #1 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-23 22:43
> ---
> This one appears to have fallen through the cracks. Reported exactly
--- Comment #2 from Denis dot Excoffier at airbus dot com 2010-04-26 09:58
---
I tried this morning to reproduce this bug with GCC 4.4.3 and GCC 4.5.0 and i
didn't succeed (that is: the GCC 4.4.0 bug is gone).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39883
--- Comment #1 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-23 22:43 ---
This one appears to have fallen through the cracks. Reported exactly one year
ago, and now accidentally shows up in my search because my brain believed we
still live in 2009... Oh well.
I tried to reproduce this with
