This is the mail archive of the gcc@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: Bug or feature - merging linkage declarations from static forced-inline functions

From: Freddie Chopin <freddie_chopin at op dot pl>
To: Nathan Sidwell <nathan at acm dot org>, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com>
Cc: "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 21:55:37 +0200
Subject: Re: Bug or feature - merging linkage declarations from static forced-inline functions
References: <4982388323ceebfa244146988eca3f819e51848d.camel@op.pl> <7c5f9f1dd53a56d550e40d824c94aada310cbb9d.camel@op.pl> <CAH6eHdSfYKu22yXrUjBw_po0mwnNkLPSAADRpC5yKePUW6+j2g@mail.gmail.com> <812780c4-8195-7c3f-92c3-a539ef6d747a@acm.org>

On Mon, 2018-04-30 at 15:38 -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> On 04/30/2018 03:21 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > Nathan, is this a regression for this testcase? IIUC the local
> > types
> > and the local variables should have no linkage, and not conflict.
> > 
> 
> that does seem plausible.  Freddie, please file a bug

Here it is:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85580

Regards,
FCh

References:
- Bug or feature - merging linkage declarations from static forced-inline functions
  - From: Freddie Chopin
- Re: Bug or feature - merging linkage declarations from static forced-inline functions
  - From: Freddie Chopin
- Re: Bug or feature - merging linkage declarations from static forced-inline functions
  - From: Jonathan Wakely
- Re: Bug or feature - merging linkage declarations from static forced-inline functions
  - From: Nathan Sidwell

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