From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25272 invoked by alias); 13 Jun 2006 21:47:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 25191 invoked by alias); 13 Jun 2006 21:47:27 -0000 Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 22:02:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20060613214727.25190.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug c++/28017] lack of guard variables for explicitly instantiated template static data In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu" 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 X-SW-Source: 2006-06/txt/msg01324.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Comment #8 from pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu 2006-06-13 21:47 ------- Subject: Re: lack of guard variables for explicitly instantiated template static data > > > > ------- Comment #7 from hhinnant at apple dot com 2006-06-13 21:41 ------- > (In reply to comment #6) > > Subject: Re: lack of guard variables for explicitly instantiated template > > static data > > > > > #define NEEDS_GUARD_P(decl) (TREE_PUBLIC (decl) && (DECL_COMMON (decl) \ > > > || DECL_ONE_ONLY (decl) \ > > > || DECL_WEAK (decl) \ > > > || > > > (!TARGET_WEAK_NOT_IN_ARCHIVE_TOC \ > > > || (! DECL_EXPLICIT_INSTANTIATION (decl) \ > > > && ! DECL_TEMPLATE_SPECIALIZATION (decl))))) > > > > > > ? > > > > The latter. > > Thanks. But this doesn't pass the test case on darwin. I'm not familiar > enough with the C++ FE to understand TARGET_WEAK_NOT_IN_ARCHIVE_TOC. Could you > double check the above. The "!" in front of DECL_EXPLICIT_INSTANTIATION looks > especially suspicious to me. You want the opposite of that like: (TARGET_WEAK_NOT_IN_ARCHIVE_TOC && (DECL_EXPLICIT_INSTANTIATION (decl) || DECL_TEMPLATE_SPECIALIZATION (decl))) I was quoting the case when DECL_WEAK would be set on the decl. TARGET_WEAK_NOT_IN_ARCHIVE_TOC is only defined to 1 for darwin. -- Pinski -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28017