https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113183
--- Comment #13 from Sebastian Unger ---
No worries, the constructor attribute is much better. I was aware of that, but
at the time had already several examples using .preinit_array and couldn't be
bothered to look it up. I later added the sort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113183
--- Comment #11 from Sebastian Unger ---
I see. It was the SORT_BY_INIT_PRIORITY with the section name used not actually
having a priority that triggered it, was it?! If I change the section name to
.init_array.1 then it works.
But, yes, you
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113183
--- Comment #9 from Sebastian Unger ---
(In reply to Sebastian Unger from comment #8)
> Not that on my target everything compiles and runs fine without -flto!
Not -> Note
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113183
--- Comment #8 from Sebastian Unger ---
Not that on my target everything compiles and runs fine without -flto!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113183
--- Comment #7 from Sebastian Unger ---
How is it broken and how should it be rewritten?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113183
--- Comment #4 from Sebastian Unger ---
I should have mentioned that for my TC I use binutils 2.41.
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: sebunger44 at gmail dot com
CC: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 56968
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56968=edit
Contains the LD and CPP files
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93636
--- Comment #4 from Sebastian Unger ---
I agree that the API of strncat is confusingly different to many of the other
API such as strncpy etc. However, the use-case I show is a valid one (as far as
one can ever consider any use of a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93636
Sebastian Unger changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: sebunger44 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 47801
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47801=edit
Preprocessed source file
The following c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71556
Sebastian Unger changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sebunger44 at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16602
--- Comment #14 from Sebastian Unger sebunger44 at gmail dot com ---
So how do I go about re-opening this? Or should I raise a new one?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16602
--- Comment #17 from Sebastian Unger sebunger44 at gmail dot com ---
Well, it is a bug. The question is whether it is a bug in GCC or in the
standard. I will raise it in the mailing list as suggested, but GCC could of
course again lead the way
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16602
Sebastian Unger sebunger44 at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sebunger44
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16602
--- Comment #13 from Sebastian Unger sebunger44 at gmail dot com ---
I believe the intent behind that is that the qualification of an array type is
identical to that of its element type.
I.e. the statement here is that an 'array of const ints
15 matches
Mail list logo
