2015-08-28 9:19 GMT+02:00 Kai Tietz <ktiet...@googlemail.com>:
> 2015-08-28 4:11 GMT+02:00 Jason Merrill <ja...@redhat.com>:
>> On 08/27/2015 02:12 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
>>>
>>> + else if (TREE_CODE (type) == VECTOR_TYPE)
>>> + {
>>> + if (TREE_CODE (arg1) == VECTOR_CST
>>> + && code == NOP_EXPR
>>> + && TYPE_VECTOR_SUBPARTS (type) == VECTOR_CST_NELTS (arg1))
>>> + {
>>> + tree r = copy_node (arg1);
>>> + TREE_TYPE (arg1) = type;
>>> + return r;
>>> + }
>>> + }
>>
>>
>> I would drop the check on 'code' and add a check that
>>
>> TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (type) == TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (TREE_TYPE (arg1))
>>
>> Does that still pass?
>
> Yes, is still passes. To check here for main-variant seems to be more
> robust. I commit it to branch, and will do complete
> regression-testing for it.
Completed regression-testing. No new regressions.
Kai
