search for: __end_my_section

...; other changes to the pointer inside the loop body). We know that's a buggy > pattern. Could you file a feature request for this on llvm.org/bugs ? How is detecting the "buggy" pattern helpful to the user? The linker has provided them with the interface of __start_my_section and __end_my_section symbols, and they are using it in the most obvious way possible. I have personally written this pattern before. I can't think of any other way to use this interface. What will the user do if the compiler tells them their code is wrong and optimizes it away? They will probably just mutilate the...

> It's difficult to say without a full example, but I'm very suspicious > of those global declarations. I think the compiler would be entirely > justified in assuming you could *never* get from __start_builtin_fw to > __end_builtin_fw, let alone on the first iteration: they're distinct > array objects and by definition (within C99) can't overlap. I think this should