On 10/20/21 08:28, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
The documentation on asm statements suggests asm is always a GNU
extension, but it's been part of ISO C++ since the first standard.
The documentation of -fno-asm is wrong for C++ as it states that it only
affects typeof, but actually it affects typeof an
On Wed, 20 Oct 2021 at 18:44, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 10/20/2021 6:28 AM, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > The documentation on asm statements suggests asm is always a GNU
> > extension, but it's been part of ISO C++ since the first standard.
> >
> > The documentation of -fno-asm is wrong fo
On 10/20/2021 6:28 AM, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc-patches wrote:
The documentation on asm statements suggests asm is always a GNU
extension, but it's been part of ISO C++ since the first standard.
The documentation of -fno-asm is wrong for C++ as it states that it only
affects typeof, but actual
The documentation on asm statements suggests asm is always a GNU
extension, but it's been part of ISO C++ since the first standard.
The documentation of -fno-asm is wrong for C++ as it states that it only
affects typeof, but actually it affects typeof and asm (despite asm
being part of ISO C++).
