This is the mail archive of the gcc-bugs@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]

[Bug optimization/10239] [m68k] switch jumptable causes assembler error


PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10239



------- Additional Comments From gni at gecko dot de  2003-10-08 15:00 -------
Subject: Re:  [m68k] switch jumptable causes assembler error

On Sun, Oct 05, 2003 at 06:16:13PM -0000, mark at codesourcery dot com wrote:
> 
> ------- Additional Comments From mark at codesourcery dot com  2003-10-05 18:16 -------
> Subject: Re:  [m68k] switch jumptable causes
> 	assembler error
> 
> On Fri, 2003-10-03 at 21:36, zlomek at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> > PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
> > 
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10239
> 
> This defect is not marked as 3.3 *regression*; just as a bug present in
> 3.3.

  How is a bug marked as a regression? Must that happen at the time the
  send-pr is done?

> Unless this defect did not occur in some previous release of GCC, I will
> not review this patch for GCC 3.3.

  Older GCC versions didn't have that bug. I assume that makes the bug a
  regression. However, since modern binutils don't have a problem and that
  the bug won't show up often, I think the patch isn't necessary on the
  3.3 branch. If its applied to 3.3 thats also fine for me.


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