> -----Original Message----- > From: > avr-gcc-list-bounces+eric.weddington=atmel....@nongnu.org > [mailto:avr-gcc-list-bounces+eric.weddington=atmel....@nongnu. > org] On Behalf Of Joerg Wunsch > Sent: Monday, November 02, 2009 2:57 AM > To: avr-gcc-list@nongnu.org > Subject: Re: [avr-gcc-list] Re: optimizer removes volatile > pin access code.why? > > In article <hcm55m$sh...@ger.gmane.org> you write: > > >As far as I have seen, the compiler has been working exactly as it > >says in the manual (quoted above). > > Yes, you're right. > > >Alternatively, should we ask for __attribute__((always_inline)) to > >imply inline, or give a warning if it is used for a non-inline > >function? > > I'd prefer the latter, although I guess a bug report will stay forever > unless someone is willing to also file a patch. Even then, it > requires a bit of stamina to really get the patch through all the > mailing lists, until someone finally gives his OK for the integration. > Been there, done that (with the 0b binary constant patch).
And IMHO, I highly doubt that this proposal will be approved. They will probably just come back to you and say that there's no need for it. _______________________________________________ AVR-GCC-list mailing list AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
