On 12/8/23 12:35, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Fri, Dec 08, 2023 at 11:51:19AM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
Do we want to do the same for TARGET_EXPR, since those are handled like
SAVE_EXPR in mostly_copy_tree_r?
In mostly_copy_tree_r yes, but I don't see cp_fold doing anything for
TARGET_EXPRs (lik
On Fri, Dec 08, 2023 at 11:51:19AM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> Do we want to do the same for TARGET_EXPR, since those are handled like
> SAVE_EXPR in mostly_copy_tree_r?
In mostly_copy_tree_r yes, but I don't see cp_fold doing anything for
TARGET_EXPRs (like it does for SAVE_EXPRs), so I think T
On 12/7/23 04:28, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
The following testcase is miscompiled because two ubsan instrumentations
run into each other.
The first one is the shift instrumentation. Before the C++ FE calls
it, it wraps the 2 shift arguments with cp_save_expr, so that side-effects
in them aren't
Hi!
The following testcase is miscompiled because two ubsan instrumentations
run into each other.
The first one is the shift instrumentation. Before the C++ FE calls
it, it wraps the 2 shift arguments with cp_save_expr, so that side-effects
in them aren't evaluated multiple times. And, ubsan_ins
