Re: [PING^3] Wconversion: fixes for C++ front-end

["Manuel López-Ibáñez" <lopezibanez at gmail dot com>]

On 06/02/07, Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@cs.tamu.edu> wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Feb 2007, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
>
> | I am waiting for patches to get reviewed. I hope that at least this is
> | not my fault. If I can do something to get the patches reviewed
> | faster, please, let me know.
>
>
> The bits:
>
>        if (TREE_TYPE (op0) != result_type)
> -      op0 = cp_convert (result_type, op0);
> -      if (TREE_TYPE (op1) != result_type)
> -      op1 = cp_convert (result_type, op1);
> +      {
> +        convert_and_check (result_type, op0);
> +          op0 = cp_convert (result_type, op0);
> +          }
> +      if (TREE_TYPE (op1) != result_type)
> +      {
> +        convert_and_check (result_type, op1);
> +          op1 = cp_convert (result_type, op1);
> +      }
>
>
> convert op0, but throw the result away, then call cp_convert
> to convert again.  That looks curious to me.  Why would we want to do
> that?

Well, I would love to just use convert_and_check. But it didn't seem
to me that cp_convert was the same as the convert function invoked
from convert_and_check. (Both are defined in cp/cvt.c). So I preferred
to be on the safe side rather than experiment with my ignorance.

If you think that it is safe to replace cp_convert with convert, then
it is safe to use the return value of convert_and_check.

Thanks for looking at this,

Manuel.