[Bug c++/4131] Why the C++ compiler don't place a const class object to .rodata section?
--- Comment #11 from bjoern dot haase at de dot bosch dot com 2006-08-10 12:11 --- Hi, here is a much simpler test case for this issue. Bjoern. #include complex using namespace std; const complexchar should_be_in_rodata (42,-42); complexchar should_be_in_data (42,-42); complexchar should_be_in_bss; -- bjoern dot haase at de dot bosch dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bjoern dot haase at de dot ||bosch dot com http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4131
[Bug c++/4131] Why the C++ compiler don't place a const class object to .rodata section?
--- Comment #12 from mrs at apple dot com 2006-08-10 16:54 --- Trivially, one could use turing completeness at compile time to achieve the desired result. :-) Not that I think that is better than `fixing' this bug. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4131
[Bug c++/4131] Why the C++ compiler don't place a const class object to .rodata section?
--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-18 00:51 --- Reopening this bug since it is the correct one to keep open. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|DUPLICATE | http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4131
[Bug c++/4131] Why the C++ compiler don't place a const class object to .rodata section?
-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|NEW http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4131
[Bug c++/4131] Why the C++ compiler don't place a const class object to .rodata section?
--- Comment #10 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-18 00:55 --- *** Bug 22575 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4131
[Bug c++/4131] Why the C++ compiler don't place a const class object to .rodata section?
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-20 18:44 --- *** Bug 22575 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- What|Removed |Added CC||pluto at agmk dot net http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4131
[Bug c++/4131] Why the C++ compiler don't place a const class object to .rodata section?
--- Additional Comments From pluto at agmk dot net 2005-07-20 18:53 --- hmm, i think someone should reopen this bug. 4.1 is a good place for major changes in c++ front-end ;) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4131
[Bug c++/4131] Why the C++ compiler don't place a const class object to .rodata section?
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-20 18:58 --- (In reply to comment #4) hmm, i think someone should reopen this bug. 4.1 is a good place for major changes in c++ front-end ;) Not any more since we are in stage3 already. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4131
[Bug c++/4131] Why the C++ compiler don't place a const class object to .rodata section?
--- Additional Comments From schlie at comcast dot net 2005-07-20 19:03 --- (In reply to comment #5) (In reply to comment #4) hmm, i think someone should reopen this bug. 4.1 is a good place for major changes in c++ front-end ;) Not any more since we are in stage3 already. - given that 4.1's front end has already evolved from that in 2.95, it's not clear that a conclusion based on 2.95 is even valid for 4.1. (so should no likely assumed as being so). -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4131
Re: [Bug c++/4131] Why the C++ compiler don't place a const class object to .rodata section?
On Jul 20, 2005, at 3:03 PM, schlie at comcast dot net wrote: - given that 4.1's front end has already evolved from that in 2.95, it's not clear that a conclusion based on 2.95 is even valid for 4.1. (so should no likely assumed as being so). It still is true since the front-end still does exactly what it did in 2.95 for this testcase and there have been no changes in this area really. Since the mainline is in stage3 which means no more improvements except for fixing bugs which are either regressions or non enhancement bugs. -- Pinski
[Bug c++/4131] Why the C++ compiler don't place a const class object to .rodata section?
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu 2005-07-20 19:11 --- Subject: Re: Why the C++ compiler don't place a const class object to .rodata section? On Jul 20, 2005, at 3:03 PM, schlie at comcast dot net wrote: - given that 4.1's front end has already evolved from that in 2.95, it's not clear that a conclusion based on 2.95 is even valid for 4.1. (so should no likely assumed as being so). It still is true since the front-end still does exactly what it did in 2.95 for this testcase and there have been no changes in this area really. Since the mainline is in stage3 which means no more improvements except for fixing bugs which are either regressions or non enhancement bugs. -- Pinski -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4131
[Bug c++/4131] Why the C++ compiler don't place a const class object to .rodata section?
--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2005-07-20 19:47 --- It may be true that this bug isn't going to be fixed in this cycle, but there's no reason not to keep it open instead of suspending it. The suspend state is mean for PRs where we need external things to happen, such as a defect report to be accepted. This clearly isn't the case here. I'll close this PR and reopen 22575 instead. W. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 22575 *** -- What|Removed |Added Status|SUSPENDED |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4131
