This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Solaris 10 patch status


On Tue, 23 Nov 2004, Andrew Pinski wrote:

> PR 7544 was marked as a regression, then after rth commented on it,
> it was decided this was not a bug (why I did not close it at that point
> is because I had read the email wrong saying it should be rejected, it
> was only the asm which gcc 2.95.3 should be rejected).
> 
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-01/msg00660.html

The Sun manual referenced in that thread is a C++ manual.  That bug report 
is a C bug report.  Please be more careful about distinguishing the two, 
in both directions; only recently you closed a C++ bug report on the basis 
of a C patch.  The current Solaris pragma documentation 
<http://docs.sun.com/source/817-5064/sun.specific.html#48658> is quite 
clear that in

#pragma weak symbol1 = symbol2

symbol2 must be defined, but symbol1 need not be.  There is a clear 
regression on, for example,

#pragma weak bar = foo
void foo(void) {}

A more recent C++ manual than the one referenced in the thread 
<http://docs.sun.com/source/817-0926/Pragmas_App.html> suggests that the 
same is true for C++.

-- 
Joseph S. Myers               http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~jsm28/gcc/
    jsm@polyomino.org.uk (personal mail)
    joseph@codesourcery.com (CodeSourcery mail)
    jsm28@gcc.gnu.org (Bugzilla assignments and CCs)


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]