On Tuesday 06 September 2005 15:37, Richard Kenner wrote: > What would be your proposal as to which nodes it's valid to have as > operands of an ADDR_EXPR? We certainly never even thought of such a rule > before.
Hmm, odd that such a rule wouldn't exist. To me it seems an ADDR_EXPR only makes sense on something that is addressable, and a COMPOUND_EXPR is not addressable, even if, as in your example, the language semantics explain how the & is to be interpreted. IMHO for GENERIC we should only allow ADDR_EXPRs to appear on addressable things (i.e. addressable symbols). Gr. Steven
