http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48858
--- Comment #8 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-07-24 19:56:56 UTC --- (In reply to comment #7) > Tobias, did comment #4/#5 implement #35161? No. The original issue of this PR and of PR 35161 is unfixed. (I think they are duplicates.) The only change (commit of comment #4) is: If one wants to pass NULL to denote an absent argument, one can now use OPTIONAL with BIND(C), which is allowed with TS 29113. Thus, there exists now a better solution for the main usage, where the issue occurs. But it does not solve all issues.
