This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug c++/11131] [3.4 Regression]Unrelated declaration removes inline flag from function
- From: "steven at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 29 Jul 2003 09:16:12 -0000
- Subject: [Bug c++/11131] [3.4 Regression]Unrelated declaration removes inline flag from function
- References: <20030609125100.11131.bangerth@dealii.org>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11131
------- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2003-07-29 09:16 -------
Don't you just love grep? I used it to search the gcc-testresults archives,
and found out this:
Last time test passed:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2003-07/msg00668.html
LAST_UPDATED: Fri Jul 11 21:17:03 UTC 2003
686-unknown-openbsd3.1
First time test failed:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2003-07/msg00690.html
LAST_UPDATED: Sat Jul 12 04:01:24 UTC 2003
686-unknown-openbsd3.1
FAIL: g++.dg/opt/template1.C scan-assembler-not foo1
So in that ~7 hour window a patch was checked in that caused this regression.
That shouldn't be too hard to find with the reghunt script.