This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug tree-optimization/71104] [7 Regression] ICE: verify_ssa failed (with vfork / error: definition in block 3 does not dominate use in block 7 )
- From: "jason at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2016 15:57:04 +0000
- Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/71104] [7 Regression] ICE: verify_ssa failed (with vfork / error: definition in block 3 does not dominate use in block 7 )
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <bug-71104-4 at http dot gcc dot gnu dot org/bugzilla/>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71104
Jason Merrill <jason at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #10 from Jason Merrill <jason at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #9)
> (In reply to rguenther@suse.de from comment #8)
> > Not that I like this proposal at all (given it changes function arg
> > evaluation order on x86_64).
>
> Does it?
> "the function is evaluated before all its arguments, but any pair of
> arguments (from the argument list) is indeterminately sequenced"
>
> The notation a(b1, b2, b3) means that there is no particular order between
> b1 and b2, otherwise it would be written a(b, c, d).
That's a variant of the proposal, but at the last meeting there was more of a
push toward requiring left-to-right evaluation.