On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 03:39:36PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 1:13 PM, Marek Polacek <pola...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > But I'm also wondering about massage_init_elt. It has
> > tree t = fold_non_dependent_expr (init);
> > t = maybe_constant_init (t);
> > but given that fold_non_dependent_expr now calls maybe_constant_value, which
> > then causes that we try to cache the calls above, this seems excessive,
> > wouldn't we be better off with just calling fold_non_dependent_init as
> > discussed recently?
>
> Probably.
Do you want me to try it for GCC 8 or should we table it for GCC 9?
I would think the latter since it's not a regression, just an optimization.
> OK.
Thanks.
Marek
