This is the mail archive of the
ecos-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the eCos project.
Re: init_priority fix for services/memalloc
man, 27.09.2004 kl. 20.31 skrev Andrew Lunn:
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 08:14:40PM +0200, ?yvind Harboe wrote:
> > man, 27.09.2004 kl. 19.39 skrev Andrew Lunn:
> > > On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 03:27:02PM +0200, ?yvind Harboe wrote:
> > > > The following works w/GCC 3.4.2:
> > > >
> > > > static foo CYGBLD_ATTRIB_INIT_PRI(N) bar;
> > > >
> > > > This does not:
> > > >
> > > > static foo bar CYGBLD_ATTRIB_INIT_PRI(N) ;
> > >
> > > Is this just the init priority attribute or do all attributes break?
> >
> > Don't know.
> >
> > > How does it break. Syntax error or code which does the wrong
> > > thing.
> >
> > Code does wrong thing.
>
> Thats bad to start with. Bad enough to report to the gcc people. It
> should either:
>
> 1) Report a syntax error
>
> or
>
> 2) Produce correct code.
>
> eCos code has the attribute at the end, so to save us having to find
> and change them i all suggest 2) is the correct thing for the compiler
> :-)
>
>
> > It would be nice to have a consensus from the eCos community before I
> > shout "compiler bug!" :-)
>
> I would not shout compiler bug. Rather i would ask what the expected
> behavious is. Its a more tactfull approach.
It is not a compiler bug, it is the intended behaviour! :-)
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2002-08/msg00792.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14161
>
> Andrew
--
Øyvind Harboe
http://www.zylin.com