On Thu, 4 Jun 2020 at 10:22, Marc Glisse <marc.gli...@inria.fr> wrote:
> > So the change is correct. Can we test the change somehow? > > It passes the testsuite, and libc++ has been doing it this way for years. > What I feared was some regression where it would yield worse code in some > cases, or lose some property (not guaranteed by the standard) like > triviality (to the point of affecting the ABI?), but I couldn't see > anything like that happening. > > (we still have PR86173 causing unnecessary memset in some cases) Right, I was just wondering whether we can reasonably verify in a test that the whole shebang is not zeroed. That may need a tree-dump scan in the test, and probably should go into PR86173 anyway, so I'm not saying such a thing needs to be a part of this fix. I'm kindly suggesting to Jonathan that this should be OK, and backports too.
