On 11/17/2015 03:07 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 5:31 AM, Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com> wrote:
On 11/16/2015 10:55 PM, David Wohlferd wrote:
- There is no standard that says it must do this.
True. But these after all are extensions and extensions have been
notoriously under-documented through the years.
- I'm only aware of 1 person who has ever asked for this change. And the
request has been deemed so unimportant it has languished for a very long
time.
True. But I'd say for this case it means it just hasn't been high enough on
anyone's priority list to get resolved. I wouldn't be at all surprised if
Richard filed this bug to ensure that it didn't get lost. That's standard
development procedure for items we notice, but aren't actively working on.
It's unfortunate that Andrew muddied the waters. Andrew's conclusions,
particularly in c#6 are simply wrong.
Sorry about that. I have since changed my views on this matter to say
old-style asm should clobber memory. I should have written this
sooner but I have been busy with other things.
I certainly understand being busy with other things. Thanks for chiming
in and clarifying your current thoughts.
Jeff
