http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58794
--- Comment #5 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> --- > I'm sure that we can build such FIELD_DECL only with Ada though, so, Eric, > can you provide a testcase where that happens - thus, that shows that > side-effects cannot be ignored here by for example comparing > &f.x and &f.x for a case where that is not equal? I think we need to > concern ourselves only with mutating side-effects, not a volatile load. I don't think so, we do not rely on expressions appearing in offsets or sizes to implement the semantics of the language, that would be too error-prone; instead these expressions are computed once for all when the type is elaborated. > The question is whether the patch is ok as-is or if I have to make > behavior dependent on is_gimple_form (ugh). A testcase that breaks > if not guarding it that way would be nice to have (I'll check if anything > existing triggers). Go ahead I'd say.
