https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99680
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Assignee|jakub at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99680
--- Comment #5 from Vladimir Makarov ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
> I was worried that letters that introduce multi-letter constraints followed
> by '\0' could be a problem too. Or do we rely on those being dropped
> already
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99680
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I was worried that letters that introduce multi-letter constraints followed by
'\0' could be a problem too. Or do we rely on those being dropped already
earlier?
Something like "=B" on x86_64 etc. In what
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99680
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Vladimir Makarov :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8bf983c71e42d5a9f9df8a7dc436b30cd9da42f5
commit r11-7748-g8bf983c71e42d5a9f9df8a7dc436b30cd9da42f5
Author: Vladimir N. Makarov
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99680
--- Comment #2 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Sorry for the troubles with my previous patch. I should have not be in hurry to
fix PR99663.
I'll fix it today. Jakub's patch could be a candidate but I prefer check
constraint[0] on '\0'.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99680
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99680
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Priority|P3
