------- Comment #6 from eric dot weddington at atmel dot com 2010-08-22 19:14 ------- (In reply to comment #5) > Hmm, I am confused. With my patch for pure constructor removal I get > .text > .p2align 4,,15 > .globl main > .type main, @function > main: > .LFB9: > .cfi_startproc > movss .LC0(%rip), %xmm0 > xorl %eax, %eax > mulss _ZN3AvgILi20EE6ResultE(%rip), %xmm0 > movss %xmm0, _ZN3AvgILi20EE6ResultE(%rip) > ret > .cfi_endproc > .LFE9: > .size main, .-main > .p2align 4,,15 > .type _GLOBAL__I_main, @function > _GLOBAL__I_main: > .LFB12: > .cfi_startproc > cmpb $0, _ZGVN3AvgILi20EE6ResultE(%rip) > jne .L2 > movb $1, _ZGVN3AvgILi20EE6ResultE(%rip) > .L2: > rep > ret > .cfi_endproc > .LFE12: > > that is there is one static constructor that seems necessary. Is that what > expected? >
I think the above comment is misplaced. This bug (#36310) is for the avr target and the above is not avr assembly. Bug #36310 was marked as a duplicate of bug #17736. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36310
