https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93855
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||easyhack
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93855
--- Comment #4 from Roland Illig ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> (In reply to Roland Illig from comment #2)
> > While here, the comment style should be made the same in
> > attr-access-read-write.c and attr-access-read-only.c. C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93855
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Roland Illig from comment #2)
> While here, the comment style should be made the same in
> attr-access-read-write.c and attr-access-read-only.c. Currently, one file
> uses /* block comments */ wh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93855
--- Comment #2 from Roland Illig ---
While here, the comment style should be made the same in
attr-access-read-write.c and attr-access-read-only.c. Currently, one file uses
/* block comments */ while the other uses // line-end comments.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93855
--- Comment #1 from Roland Illig ---
In addition, I had expected that the %i placeholder were 1-based. From
attr-access-read-only.c:
> int RDONLY (4)
> rdonly_i_i_i_4 (int, int, int);
>// { dg-error "attribute 'access\\(read_only, 4\\)'
>
