arm-elf patch for 2.12
Richard Earnshaw
rearnsha@arm.com
Thu Mar 21 08:38:00 GMT 2002
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2002 at 10:50:53AM +0000, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> > > --target=arm-elf doesn't build without this patch. Just a typo.
> > >
> > > 2002-03-20 Albert Chin-A-Young <china@thewrittenword.com>
> > >
> > > * gas/config/tc-arm.c: Fix typo (vfp_sp_reg_pos ->
> > > vfp_dp_reg_pos) for vfp_dp_reg_required_here().
> > >
> >
> > I was at a loss to understand why this hadn't been caught before, until I
> > noted that gcc fails to diagnose this problem. I've filed a gcc bug
> > report on it as well.
>
> I'd lay money they'll tell you it's a feature. If the function was
> actually prototyped, and the PARAMS (()) did not match the declaration,
> that would be reported; but for a non-prototyped function you have more
> leeway.
But the function is prototyped. See gcc PR c/6024.
Basically, gcc accepts the following without either a warning or an error
(unless you use -fshort-enums; even then it only complains if the sizes of
the enums differ):
enum e1 {a, b=1001};
enum e2 {c, d};
void f(enum e1);
void f(x)
enum e2 x;
{
return;
}
R.
More information about the Binutils
mailing list