Hi Mark, > That's a bug, or, rather, a place where the C++ front-end is failing > to give full information to the optimizer. It should be > TREE_READONLY. There are some tricky bits, in that if we're doing a > dynamic initialization, we presently cannot mark it TREE_READONLY, > but this is a static initialization, so it should be fine. Isn't > TREE_OPERAND (T, 0) the VAR_DECL for array itself?
Yes, if T is an ARRAY_REF, TREE_OPERAND (T, 0) is the VAR_DECL for the array itself. > If so, waht's probably going wrong is that it's not being marked > TREE_READONLY because we're afraid of the dynamic initialization > case. We're missing a call to c_apply_quals_to_decl (sp?) > somewhere. Thank you for the function name. I might dig into the C++ front end. Anyway, I filed this "bug" as PR 21454, saying that the contents of a "completely static" array ends up in the .data section, not the .rodata. It turned out to be a regression from 3.x. Kazu Hirata
