This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: RFA: fix valgrind failures 3/3 (cp_parser_initializer_clause)
- From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Joern RENNECKE <joern dot rennecke at st dot com>
- Cc: Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 10:14:00 -0800
- Subject: Re: RFA: fix valgrind failures 3/3 (cp_parser_initializer_clause)
- Organization: CodeSourcery, LLC
- References: <41F6A121.email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <41F6A6C6.email@example.com>
Joern RENNECKE wrote:
Zack Weinberg wrote:
I think this should go in cp_parser_initializer_list instead ofThat is not what the start-of-function comments say. In front of
cp_parser_initializer_clause. It seems to be the convention that the
callers of cp_parser_initializer_clause are responsible for default-
clearing this flag.
they say: NON_CONSTANT_P is as for cp_parser_initializer.
And in front of cp_parser_initializer, they say:
If there is an
initializer, and it is not a constant-expression, *NON_CONSTANT_P
is set to true; otherwise it is set to false.
I think that things have changed; it used to be that callers were
responsible for clearing the flag, but now it looks like it would be OK
to do it in c_p_i_c. This changed when cp_parser_initializer_list got
clause_non_constant_p, instead of passing down non_constant_p. So,
Joern's patch is OK, provided it passes tests.