This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: xfail gcc.dg test
- From: Fergus Henderson <fjh at cs dot mu dot OZ dot AU>
- To: David Edelsohn <dje at watson dot ibm dot com>
- Cc: Geoff Keating <geoffk at geoffk dot org>, Alan Modra <amodra at bigpond dot net dot au>, Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2002 01:46:26 +1000
- Subject: Re: xfail gcc.dg test
- References: <email@example.com> <200210041510.LAA30174@makai.watson.ibm.com>
On 04-Oct-2002, David Edelsohn <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> >>>>> Geoff Keating writes:
> Geoff> I believe the problem is that if you have a function named "text",
> Geoff> then the symbols for that function are "text" and ".text", which
> Geoff> causes trouble. Is it too late to change the second symbol to, say,
> Geoff> "_.text"?
> Or maybe just "text" and "_text".
That wouldn't work, because then you'd have problems if a program
contains two functions named `foo' and `_foo'. The symbols for the
first function would be `foo' and `_foo', and the symbols for
the second function would be `_foo' and `__foo'; the two different
uses of `_foo' would clash.
Fergus Henderson <email@example.com> | "I have always known that the pursuit
The University of Melbourne | of excellence is a lethal habit"
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh> | -- the last words of T. S. Garp.