From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id A218F3851422; Sun, 29 May 2022 15:13:19 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org A218F3851422
From: "linux_dr at yahoo dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug preprocessor/105732] [10/11/12/13 Regression] internal compiler
 error: unspellable token PADDING
Date: Sun, 29 May 2022 15:13:19 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: preprocessor
X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.3.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: blocker
X-Bugzilla-Who: linux_dr at yahoo dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.4
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-105732-4-4DWCiODiQ8@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-105732-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-105732-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 29 May 2022 15:13:19 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D105732

--- Comment #14 from Loren Osborn <linux_dr at yahoo dot com> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #13)
> Not entirely. https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D105732#c8 wi=
ll
> work there, https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D105732#c9 does=
 not.

If this is the case, shouldn=E2=80=99t these be split into at least two tes=
t cases?=