> On 08/23/2013 10:51 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote: > >Sadly we ICE here because BINFO of type is not built yet. > >I tried to move the code after xref_binfos and it does seem to lead to errors > >while building libstdc++ PCH. Any idea what to do here? > > If it's causing trouble, let's just put the flag on the type.
OK, I mostly need the flag on type anyway, so it will save some indirection. I will re-test and commit the variant using default_def flag of type. In the next step I would like to introduce the DECL_CPP_CONSTRUCTOR/DESTRUCTOR macro. The catch I run into is that these flags are tested on TEMPLATE_DECL so the middle-end macro bombs on type checking. I wonder what is best approach here. I guess I can just disable FUNCTION_DECL checking on this macro in middle-end, but I do not like it much. Or I can have same C++ FE macros using the same flag that also allow templates, but then we can get them out of sync. Or I can update 100+ places in C++ FE to use different macro on template or I can introduce SET variant that will care about decl type or I can just have two flags and make C++ FE to mirror DECL_CONSTRUCTOR_P into the middle end flag? Any more resonable options? > > >here I now can devirtualize b->foo into A because A is in anonymous > >namespace. > >We however won't remove b because it is externally visible. Is it valid to > >bring b local based on fact that A is anonymous and thus no valid C++ program > >can read it? > > Hmm, determine_visibility ought to be doing that already. You are right. I simplified the testcase from code I looked at but probably I overlooked something. Sorry for the noise! Honza
