[Issue 9623] Illegal Win64 linker optimization?
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9623 Rainer Schuetze r.sagita...@gmx.de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||r.sagita...@gmx.de --- Comment #5 from Rainer Schuetze r.sagita...@gmx.de --- See also issue 10664. It is the reason why we currently have -L/OPT:NOICF in sc.ini. --
[Issue 9623] Illegal Win64 linker optimization?
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9623 --- Comment #4 from Martin Nowak c...@dawg.eu --- Also see bug 9655. --
[Issue 9623] Illegal Win64 linker optimization?
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9623 Martin Nowak c...@dawg.eu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Comment #2 from Martin Nowak c...@dawg.eu 2013-03-04 04:53:03 PST --- (In reply to comment #1) I have mixed feelings about whether this is a bug or not. Me too and as this optimization becomes probably even more important to fold TypeInfos and precise GC metadata I will close this for now. Related C++ article Can Two Functions Have the Same Address? http://www.informit.com/guides/content.aspx?g=cplusplusseqNum=561 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 9623] Illegal Win64 linker optimization?
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9623 Walter Bright bugzi...@digitalmars.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bugzi...@digitalmars.com --- Comment #1 from Walter Bright bugzi...@digitalmars.com 2013-03-01 14:12:22 PST --- I have mixed feelings about whether this is a bug or not. First off, nothing in the dmd spec requires that identical function bodies must have distinct addresses. Second, this is an important optimization to reduce template bloat. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
