https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58770
--- Comment #8 from Sam James ---
(See the thread at
https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/6027e3bb-99f9-573b-ff5e-ea1a48882...@acm.org/.)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58770
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||easyhack
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58770
s at martinien dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||s at martinien dot de
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58770
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #4)
> Sorry, I don't understand this. The #ifdef include-guards do prevent a
> second inclusion, even if done by a different file name, no?
No, including the f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58770
--- Comment #4 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Tom Tromey from comment #3)
> I think the rationale for this code is that the #pragma must
> prevent a second inclusion, even if done by a different file
> name; whereas #ifdef exclusion do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58770
Tom Tromey changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tromey at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58770
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58770
Ólafur Waage changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||olafurw at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 f
