On 1/7/20 5:46 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Hi,
On 06/01/20 21:47, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 1/2/20 4:23 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
@@ -19320,8 +19320,8 @@ tsubst_copy_and_build (tree t,
tree op1 = tsubst (TREE_OPERAND (t, 1), args, complain,
in_decl);
tree op2 = RECUR (TREE_OPERAND (t
Hi,
On 06/01/20 21:47, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 1/2/20 4:23 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
@@ -19320,8 +19320,8 @@ tsubst_copy_and_build (tree t,
tree op1 = tsubst (TREE_OPERAND (t, 1), args, complain,
in_decl);
tree op2 = RECUR (TREE_OPERAND (t, 2));
- ret = build_new (&placement_v
On 1/2/20 4:23 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
@@ -19320,8 +19320,8 @@ tsubst_copy_and_build (tree t,
tree op1 = tsubst (TREE_OPERAND (t, 1), args, complain, in_decl);
tree op2 = RECUR (TREE_OPERAND (t, 2));
- ret = build_new (&placement_vec, op1, op2, &init_vec,
-
Hi,
some rather straightforward bits for build_new /
cp_parser_new_expression, almost a clean-up. It would be nice to do
better for the diagnostic issued from build_new_1 too but having
consistent locations for all the valid_array_size_p and
invalid_array_size_error calls isn't trivial, I'd r
