This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: PR java/27025: ICE on simple initializer


Andrew Haley wrote:
David Daney writes:
> Andrew Haley wrote:
> > gcj assumes that in the operation (A + B), where A and B are
> > constants, the result must be a constant. It ain't necessaarily so.
> > Can you tell my how to reconcile your claim with JLS (v2 or v3) section > 15.28? Especially in relation to the testcase in the PR.


I don't think it's relevant. Can you think of any place it might be?


In line 4 of the testcase the JLS requires that FULL_NAME be "A compile-time constant expression"


In this case A + B + C where A, B and C are all constants, is required to be a constant.

Does this have any relevance with respect to the patch? I have no idea. I will be quiet now.

David Daney


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]