------- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-24 09:22 -------
Smaller testcase:
struct Empty { Empty() {} };
struct Other {
Other(const Empty& e_) : e(e_) {}
Empty e;
};
void bar(Other&);
void foo()
{
Empty e;
Other o(e);
bar(o);
}
RTL expansion removes the assignment, so we should be able to use the same
reasoning to disable the warning and/or to get rid of the assignment on
the tree level. RTL uses expr_size() here, which yields const0_rtx for e
and o. As this involves a langhook I think the correct thing is to fix
the missed-optimization and remove these stores during gimplification
(or from within the frontend, of course).
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |lopezibanez at gmail dot
| |com, rguenth at gcc dot gnu
| |dot org
Priority|P2 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38851
