On Wed, 12 May 2021, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 5/7/21 4:21 AM, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > On Fri, May 7, 2021 at 12:17 PM Richard Biener wrote:
> >>
> >> canonicalize_constructor_val was setting TREE_ADDRESSABLE on bases
> >> of ADDR_EXPRs but that's futile when we're dealing with C
On 5/7/21 4:21 AM, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote:
On Fri, May 7, 2021 at 12:17 PM Richard Biener wrote:
canonicalize_constructor_val was setting TREE_ADDRESSABLE on bases
of ADDR_EXPRs but that's futile when we're dealing with CTOR values
in debug stmts. This rips out the code which wa
_list b = { 1, 2, 3 };
> const int *p = b.begin();
> if (!t)
> return f (1, p);
> return p == a;
> }
>
> int main(void)
> {
> if (f(0, 0))
>abort ();
> return 0;
> }
>
> so adjusting the array-temp testcase seems like the right answer.
Don
On 5/7/21 6:21 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, May 7, 2021 at 12:17 PM Richard Biener wrote:
canonicalize_constructor_val was setting TREE_ADDRESSABLE on bases
of ADDR_EXPRs but that's futile when we're dealing with CTOR values
in debug stmts. This rips out the code which was added for Java
On Fri, May 7, 2021 at 12:17 PM Richard Biener wrote:
>
> canonicalize_constructor_val was setting TREE_ADDRESSABLE on bases
> of ADDR_EXPRs but that's futile when we're dealing with CTOR values
> in debug stmts. This rips out the code which was added for Java
> and should have been an assertion
canonicalize_constructor_val was setting TREE_ADDRESSABLE on bases
of ADDR_EXPRs but that's futile when we're dealing with CTOR values
in debug stmts. This rips out the code which was added for Java
and should have been an assertion when we didn't have debug stmts.
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_
