http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38161
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 57345 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38161
Harald van Dijk changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||harald at gigawatt dot nl
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38161
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||signupnathan at gmail dot com
--- Comment
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-05 12:20 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 36453 ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #3 from neil at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-18 22:18 ---
The standard talks about the groups controlled by conditionals being skipped.
There is no conditional controlling the #elif - it is at the top level - so I
see nothing permitting its non-evaluation.
--
http://gcc.
--- Comment #2 from h dot b dot furuseth at usit dot uio dot no 2008-11-17
20:15 ---
Subject: Re: [4.4 regression] #elif breaks
Yes, I should have read the #36320 text more carefully. I merely
noticed that its empty #elif cannot expand to anything correct, while
my example can (and
--- Comment #1 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-17 17:29 ---
According to my reading of the standard, this code is in fact incorrect.
This is basically the same as #36320.
I'm beginning to wonder, though, whether this change was overly eager on my
part
and should be made -peda
