This is the mail archive of the gcc@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: PR middle-end/18160

From: Dale Johannesen <dalej at apple dot com>
To: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, Dale Johannesen <dalej at apple dot com>, Adam Nemet <anemet at lnxw dot com>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 15:51:21 -0700
Subject: Re: PR middle-end/18160
References: <16766.43717.959860.195034@anemet1.lynx.com> <20041026195203.GA15086@redhat.com> <16766.46685.198957.191723@anemet1.lynx.com> <20041026202657.GA15269@redhat.com> <16766.54682.82730.11990@anemet1.lynx.com> <20041026224419.GA15592@redhat.com>

On Oct 26, 2004, at 3:44 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:


  register int bar;
  &bar;

to be the case we were allowing as just a warning.  Which,
I suppose, is ok.  Personally I'd still vote for a hard
error, but whatever.


Me too.  Taking the address of register vbls has been banned
since the original K&R book, and I can see no conceivable
benefit to allowing it.  Anybody know why this is there?

References:
- PR middle-end/18160
  - From: Adam Nemet
- Re: PR middle-end/18160
  - From: Richard Henderson
- Re: PR middle-end/18160
  - From: Adam Nemet
- Re: PR middle-end/18160
  - From: Richard Henderson
- Re: PR middle-end/18160
  - From: Adam Nemet
- Re: PR middle-end/18160
  - From: Richard Henderson

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