--- Comment #5 from reza dot yazdani at amd dot com 2010-02-05 23:14
---
"The optimization performed is correct because:
In C++ (not in C) a const modifier in a global variable has internal
linkage (i.e. it is treated like a static variable) and therefore the
optimization performed is
--- Comment #4 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-08 15:13 ---
Hmm, actually I sort of agree with HJ. It's a global (and unhidden)
definition, which very well can be replaced by a different definition at
runtime. In particular that will happen for instance if the global data
is d
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-05-07 20:29 ---
Created an attachment (id=15613)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15613&action=view)
A testcase
[EMAIL PROTECTED] pic-1]$ make
/export/build/gnu/gcc-expand/build-x86_64-linux/gcc/xgcc
-B/export/bu
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-07 19:45 ---
Right. I believe there was even some ELF reasoning here... Micha?
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-05 05:51 ---
Actually it does not make sense to have any other value than 3 here.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35501
