This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [tree-ssa] Misc C++ improvements
- From: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
- To: law at redhat dot com
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 15:17:25 -0500
- Subject: Re: [tree-ssa] Misc C++ improvements
- References: <200303211927.h2LJRek8005074@speedy.slc.redhat.com>
On Fri, 21 Mar 2003 12:27:40 -0700, law at redhat dot com wrote:
> >> 2. Apparently in C++ you can get a TYPE_DECL with a field which refers
> >> back to the TYPE_DECL (it happens in the testsuite somewhere).
> >
> >I don't understand why we're walking into TYPE_DECLs at all. Shouldn't
> >that be RECORD_TYPE (et al) instead?
> You have a toplevel TYPE_DECL, which has a RECORD_TYPE which refers back
> to the toplevel TYPE_DECL.
Yes, all classes have a nested TYPE_DECL referring to the class itself.
But my question remains: Why does the VLA code care about TYPE_DECLs? We
should only be interested in the types of local variables, specifically
either ARRAY_TYPEs or RECORD_TYPEs which contain FIELD_DECLs of ARRAY_TYPE
(or RECORD_TYPE, etc.). There's no reason to look at TYPE_DECLs at all.
Jason