This is the mail archive of the 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: [PATCH] Fix PR34081/C++ ICE in s390_function_value

On Nov 23, 2007 4:19 PM, Jakub Jelinek <> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 04:00:03PM +0100, Andreas Krebbel wrote:
> > > The middle-end parts are ok.  The frontend parts would then qualify
> > > as obvious apart from
> > >
> > >    bl = current_binding_level;
> > > !   allocate_struct_function (decl1, dependent_type_p (restype));
> > >
> > > where I wonder if we shouldn't use processing_template_p instead of
> > > dependent_type_p?
> >
> > You mean processing_template_decl?!
> processing_template_decl, sure.
> I believe non-dependent types should be already laid out by the time
> this is called and therefore dependent_type_p (restype) should work
> just fine as the argument.
> Perhaps Richard wanted to pass processing_template_decl because computing it
> is cheaper?

I was mainly worried about possible side-effects of dependent_type_p (as
I don't know the C++ frontend good enough).  And I remember us using
processing_template_decl in similar places.

But yes, a C++ FE maintainer needs to look at this portion of the patch


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