On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 6:15 PM, Eric Botcazou <ebotca...@adacore.com> wrote: >> Hmm. The intent was of course to only allow truly no-op converts via >> VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR - that is, the size of the operand type and the >> result type should be the same. So, isn't SRA doing it wrong when >> creating the VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR of a 3-byte type to a 4-byte type? > > That's debatable IMO if the 4-byte type has 3-byte precision, but I don't have > a strong opinion so I can try to fix it in SRA, although it will be weird to > do low-level fiddling because of precision and size at the Tree level.
That's true. What I wonder is why the stmt checker doesn't trip. Probably because while SRA scalarizes the thing the result isn't rewritten into SSA form? So there may be a testcase where that happens and we'd even ICE? Richard. > -- > Eric Botcazou
