From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19291 invoked by alias); 20 Feb 2008 21:53:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 19117 invoked by uid 48); 20 Feb 2008 21:52:37 -0000 Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 21:53:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20080220215237.19116.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/19661] unnecessary atexit calls emitted for static objects with empty destructors In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2008-02/txt/msg02171.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-20 21:52 ------- (In reply to comment #7) > Why do you think the front-end doesn't know that the destructor is empty? Because it is non trivial. Try it with a more complex case where you have multiple layer destructors and inlining, you will see that the front-end does not know if it is empty until way after inlining. -- Pinski -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19661