On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 10:50 PM Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On 5/31/19 1:56 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: > > Given a poiner to array p, tree dumps for expressions like &(*p)[2] > > actually show &*p[2]. That's not right -- the parentheses are > > important to differentiate indexing into the array the pointer > > points to from indexing into the pointer. > > > > The attached patch adjusts the tree pretty printer to add the parens > > when the pointer points to an array. > > > > Tested on x86_64-linux. > > > > Martin > > > > gcc-90694.diff > > > > PR middle-end/90694 - incorrect representation of ADDR_EXPR involving a > > pointer to array > > > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > > > PR middle-end/90694 > > * tree-pretty-print.c (dump_generic_node): Add parentheses. > > > > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: > > > > PR middle-end/90694 > > * gcc.dg/tree-ssa/dump-5.c: New test. > OK. I'm going to assume that the gimple parser already does the right > thing since it's supposed to already handle C expressions correctly.
-gimple dumping doesn't elide dumping MEM_REFs to plain * so you see _1 = &__MEM <char[8]> (pa)[2]; _2 = __builtin_strlen (_1); I think the GIMPLE FE accepts *p as dereference in source, sth I should eventually fix (it likewise accepts ->). It then just does what the C frontend does since it shares most of its parsing. Richard. > Jeff
