This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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: PR21730 - would anybody shed a tear for symbol.c(check_done)?

From: Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot edu>
To: FX Coudert <fxcoudert at gmail dot com>
Cc: Paul Richard Thomas <paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com>, fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2006 10:10:05 -0800
Subject: Re: PR21730 - would anybody shed a tear for symbol.c(check_done)?
References: <339c37f20611070705t4e9f902apede71dd6a5d826d4@mail.gmail.com> <8044EB5D-B45B-4406-867D-21BF798DA7CC@gmail.com>

On Tue, Nov 07, 2006 at 06:59:37PM +0100, FX Coudert wrote:
> >As far as I can tell, the only purpose of the above function is to
> >cause PR21730; it also caused PR20869 but that was fixed otherwise.
> 
> I recently came to the same conclusion, tried to inquire further and  
> could still not find any real use for it. Go Paul!
> 

Agreed.

Simplicity, simplicity, simplicity!
Henry David Thoreau

-- 
Steve

References:
- PR21730 - would anybody shed a tear for symbol.c(check_done)?
  - From: Paul Richard Thomas
- Re: PR21730 - would anybody shed a tear for symbol.c(check_done)?
  - From: FX Coudert

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