------- Comment #5 from roger at eyesopen dot com 2006-12-01 04:04 -------
>> This needs to be handled in the front-ends...
> ^^^^^ should
^^^^^^ can only be
I was thinking of a slightly weaker form of need/must.
But there are two issues here. The division by zero is one, but its also
a red herring, we really shouldn't be accepting the code:
int x;
enum e { E = 0 * x };
which currently compiles without even a warning using -pedantic-errors.
This is exactly the sort of thing that Joseph's struct c_expr were intended
to handle. I don't think is unreasonable for fold to convert "0 * x" into
0, the issue is that a front-end can't really look at a folded tree and
determine anything much about the original source code.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19976
