This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Undefined static functions
On Mon, 30 Aug 2004, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 12:11:20AM +0000, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> > (b) Is there any reason this shouldn't be a hard error rather than just a
> > pedwarn?
>
> The function implementation is contained within a file-scope asm. I need
> to tell the compiler that the symbol is locally defined (static as opposed
> to extern), so that the proper set of relocations are selected.
>
> I have used this often in kernel and libc code.
This does rather make me wonder whether what check_global_declarations
does after warning,
/* This symbol is effectively an "extern" declaration now. */
TREE_PUBLIC (decl) = 1;
is particularly safe. Certainly it looks like setting TREE_PUBLIC after
pedwarning in the front end wouldn't be a particularly good way to stop
check_global_declarations from warning - defining TREE_NO_WARNING to apply
to decls as well as expressions looks safer.
--
Joseph S. Myers http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~jsm28/gcc/
http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~jsm28/gcc/#c90status - status of C90 for GCC 3.5
jsm@polyomino.org.uk (personal mail)
jsm28@gcc.gnu.org (Bugzilla assignments and CCs)