From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29470 invoked by alias); 1 Jun 2005 20:59:03 -0000 Mailing-List: contact java-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: java-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 29448 invoked by uid 48); 1 Jun 2005 20:59:01 -0000 Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2005 20:59:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20050601205901.29447.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "matz at suse dot de" To: java-prs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20050523165100.21722.matz@suse.de> References: <20050523165100.21722.matz@suse.de> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug java/21722] gcj miscompiles accesses to static final vars with indirect dispatch X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2005-q2/txt/msg00663.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From matz at suse dot de 2005-06-01 20:59 ------- Yes. I think this is because the compiler needs to see the definition and the use site to exhibit this bug. Without the def it will correctly emit the code walking the table to get to the member. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21722