This patch makes detect_type_change analysis assume that only ADDR_EXPRs can be assigned to vtable entries.
Initially, the patch made a less strict assumption that constants are not
assigned to vtables. I then bumped the assumption to "only ADDR_EXPRs can be
assigned to vtables". I have this patch since GCC 4.6 and did not came across
a testcase that would invalidate either of the assumptions.
Martin, you are the author of stmt_may_be_vtbl_ptr_store; is there any reason
to assume that something other than ADDR_EXPR can be assigned to a vtable?
Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-linux-gnu {-m64/-m32} with no regressions.
OK for trunk?
Thank you,
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
CodeSourcery / Mentor Graphics
fsf-gcc-vtbl-assign.ChangeLog
Description: Binary data
fsf-gcc-vtbl-assign.patch
Description: Binary data
