Hi, On Sat, 3 Sep 2011, Richard Guenther wrote:
> > your patch and apply mine entirely, as eliminating alloca (0) early > > looks a interesting simplification. What do you think? > > I'm not sure we want to create a the replacement decl with DECL_SIZE > zero though, so I suppose instead of making sure align is BITS_PER_UNIT > shouldn't we make sure that size is at least 1? I fear we might run > into other odd problems with zero-size autos. > > Thus, a variant of the patch that re-enables handling of size zero > allocas but adjusts the size to be at least 1 is ok. > > Other opinions? Yes. Create zero-sized autos for alloca(0) as Eric proposes, and fix the fallout that might happen. There's no reason to add work-arounds for bugs preemptively. Ciao, Michael.
