From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31829 invoked by alias); 3 Feb 2004 20:19:42 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 31797 invoked by uid 48); 3 Feb 2004 20:19:41 -0000 Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 20:19:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20040203201941.31796.qmail@sources.redhat.com> From: "uweigand at gcc dot gnu dot org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20040125122814.13856.aj@gcc.gnu.org> References: <20040125122814.13856.aj@gcc.gnu.org> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c/13856] [3.4/3.5 Regression] hidden support broken with builtin functions X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2004-02/txt/msg00434.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From uweigand at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-02-03 20:19 ------- We're seeing this problem on s390 as well. (B.t.w. this doesn't appear to have anything to do with "builtin functions", does it?) >>From my initial experiments, it would appear that the problem is caused by the K&R-style function definition -- when using a C89-style definition like int fputs_unlocked (const char *str, int *fp) everything works as expected. Maybe something goes wrong when merging attributes between the declaration and definition type nodes in case the latter is K&R? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13856