https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88112
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> --- On Tue, 20 Nov 2018, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88112 > > --- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> --- > > Index: gcc/tree.c > > =================================================================== > > --- gcc/tree.c (revision 266308) > > +++ gcc/tree.c (working copy) > > @@ -5260,7 +5260,7 @@ free_lang_data_in_one_sizepos (tree *exp > > Note this should only happen for abstract copies so setting sizes > > to NULL is OK (but we cannot easily assert this). */ > > else if (expr && !is_gimple_val (expr)) > > - *expr_p = NULL_TREE; > > + *expr_p = build0 (PLACEHOLDER_EXPR, TREE_TYPE (expr)); > > } > > > > > > fixes the ICE but not sure if that's good. Setting to size_zero_node > > also works (so much for "proper" type checking ...). Maybe it's better > > to adjust the type-checker somehow? > > The C++ front-end should be fixed instead, i.e. it should gimplify all the > size > expressions (like the Ada front-end does). It's a type that only lives in the abstract origin which is never output, so the FE somewhat has a point in not needing to gimplify it (similar to the Ada case with gloal types that cannot be gimplified). Can Ada global types ever have CALL_EXPRs in their size expressions?
