https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59888
--- Comment #19 from Iain Sandoe <iains at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Zaak from comment #18) > (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #17) > > by the way, I haven't been able to find a C reproducer for this issue - if > > you feel we should have a testcase for it perhaps a link test for the > > fortran example would work? The Fortran FE folks might also want to convince themselves that the behaviour FX describes in comment #8 is correct. > It would be great to have a test to prevent future regressions here. I have > no experience contributing to GCC or using dejagnu but if people are having > trouble cooking up a C source to produce an object/library to link the > Fortran against, I can try to find something to trigger this. That's not the problem; When C generates initialisers for function pointers, these end up in the correct section already, the problem is triggered by something that the Fortran FE does differently. So that means it's going to be hard to make a test that lives outside the Fortran testsuite. A testcase does not have to execute to be useful (a link test using the code at comment #12 would be OK). However someone has to package the test and decide where it should live in the Fortran testsuite :-) > As I mentioned previously this blocks gtk-fortran from linking on Darwin, > however both GTK and gtk-fortran are not adequately small reproducers. I will back port this in due course.
