------- Comment #22 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-31 14:36 ------- > Huh? The third comment in 26507 (by you I might add) agrees that PR 26507 and > this one are the same problem. We should close one as a dup of the other.
I precisely chose not to close either because of their different scope. > I also don't understand what you mean by pre-4.2. Is that a roundabout way of > saying 4.1? Yes, it is. :-) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23541
