Georg-Johann Lay <a...@gjlay.de> writes: > Richard Sandiford schrieb: >> Georg-Johann Lay <avr@> writes: >> >>>Attached you find a new, tentative patch. It resolves the issue in my >>>small test program. However, I think someone with more insight into >>>combine should take over the patch. >> >> OK, point taken :-) If you'd prefer someone else to approve it >> that's fine. > > Sorry for the misunderstanding. > > The "someone else" didn't refer to the approver part, it's because I am > unexperienced with combine.
Ah, in that case I'm the one who should apologise. I probably misunderstood because it's all too true that I don't know this code very well. :-) > If you are fine with the patch (and the local block around predicat) I'd > gladly check it in and backport to 4.6 where the PR also pops up. I'd prefer it without the local block, and the variable declared (but not initialised) at the start of the function, but otherwise it's OK for both trunk and 4.6 as far as I'm concerned. I realise you posted the patch a while ago now, but let's leave it 24 hours just in case anyone wants to object. Thanks, Richard
