Dave Korn wrote:
> Tobias Burnus wrote:
>> I agree that for "main" the call to "__main()" should happend and thus
>> expand_main_function should be called. I'm not sure in about the exact
>> assumptions of the middle end. In principle, it would be OK if the
>> MAIN__ function would show up as MAIN__ in gimple/-fdump-tree-original.
>> The only potential inconvenience I see, is the mentioned reference to
>> MAIN__ instead of <program name> in middle-end warnings, which can
>> confuse users.
>
> Wouldn't the simplest thing be to rename the other main function - the
> initialisation one that is automatically generated by create_main_function()?
> It could be called anything different we liked, and it's not user-visible, so
> it ought to not be a problem to rename?
Argh, no. Cygwin crt0 for one expects the entrypoint function to be called
_main in any language. Hmmm.
cheers,
DaveK
