Re: [Tinycc-devel] Re: Wandering through Dave Dodge's tcc patches...

[Mark]

Sounds like it. Different compilers handle different declarations 
differently. 'Const' in one may mean something totally different than 
another. Scope declaration might have been the problem, not in your code, 
but how the compiler handled it.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dave Dodge" <address@hidden>
To: "Rob Landley" <address@hidden>
Cc: <address@hidden>
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 6:28 AM
Subject: [Tinycc-devel] Re: Wandering through Dave Dodge's tcc patches...


> On Thu, Feb 22, 2007 at 04:06:55PM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
> > but on the function parameters patch, I can't reproduce the failure
> > in my tree.  The patch isn't applied, but possibly it was already
> > fixed somewhere else?
>
> It's apparently been fixed.  This fails to compile with tcc 0.9.21:
>
>  extern int foo(int);
>  int foo(int const x) { return x; }
>
> but works fine with more recent versions.  Fabrice's changelog for
> 0.9.22 mentions:
>
>  "ignore 'const' and 'volatile' in function prototypes"
>
> which I assume solved the problem.
>
>                                                  -Dave Dodge
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tinycc-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.18.3/697 - Release Date: 2/22/2007 
> 11:55 AM