This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: various C++ regressions with new compiler
- From: Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>
- To: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>, Marcus Meissner <meissner at suse dot de>,Philipp Thomas <pthomas at suse dot de>, Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse dot de>,Michael Matz <matz at suse dot de>, Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot de>,Andreas Schwab <schwab at suse dot de>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org,rth at cygnus dot com, mark at codesourcery dot com
- Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 13:48:58 +0200
- Subject: Re: various C++ regressions with new compiler
- References: <20020508135515.A18955@suse.de> <20020509103903.GM19486@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <wvlg011tumj.fsf@prospero.cambridge.redhat.com>
> >>>>> "Jan" == Jan Hubicka <jh@suse.cz> writes:
>
> > what happends is that i386.c is asked to pass as parameter record type with
> > size of 16 but with no field decls inside (only type decls).
> > I am not at all sure how this can happen, as I think only empty structures or
> > classes with no non-static data can have no field_decls.
>
> A class can have non-empty bases but not have any fields of its own. I
> have thought in the past that it would make sense to model base class
> subobjects as fields, but we don't.
I see, then I guess I need to traverse all the subclasses to get information
about there the fields are placed, right?
How can I accomplish that.
Honza
>
> Jason