https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53431

--- Comment #12 from Manuel López-Ibáñez <manu at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Allan Chandler from comment #11)
> Now you've done it. This was reported over three years ago and now it's
> affected someone on Stack Overflow. You guys are in for it now :-)

Unfortunately, the C/C++ FEs in GCC have very very few developers relative to
their importance and amount work they require. There is a patch in comment #10,
but it requires some additional work for which I do not have enough free time.
If you or someone else has some free time to finish this work, this is how I
would proceed:

1. Try to figure out why the preprocessor removes the pragmas (and not other
#-directives)
2. If you cannot figure it out, ask in gcc@ with explicit CC to C/C++/libcpp
maintainers (see MAINTAINERS file).
3. Complete the patch, bootstrap&regression test, add a Changelog, submit to
gcc-patches and ping until it is approved.

More details:
https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/GettingStarted#Basics:_Contributing_to_GCC_in_10_easy_steps

Otherwise, given that this hasn't been fixed in more than 4 years (see
PR48914), it seems likely that active developers have higher priority things to
work on and it will remain unfixed until some new volunteer steps up to the
task.

If/When I have a little free time to work on GCC, there are at least a couple
of other bugs I would rather fix before this one.
>From gcc-bugs-return-492817-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Jul 20 09:40:31 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-492817-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 117016 invoked by alias); 20 Jul 2015 09:40:31 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 116717 invoked by uid 48); 20 Jul 2015 09:40:27 -0000
From: "ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/66915] [6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/fixed-point/unary.c execution test on arm
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2015 09:40:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: middle-end
X-Bugzilla-Version: 6.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: attachments.created
Message-ID: <bug-66915-4-XvakCBXVjI@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-66915-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-66915-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2015-07/txt/msg01707.txt.bz2
Content-length: 252

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idf915

--- Comment #2 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 36015
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id6015&actioníit
Diff between good and bad versions of the assembly