This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [C++11][4.9] Add missing REDUC_PLUS_EXPR case to potential_constant_expression_1.
- From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- To: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
- Cc: James Greenhalgh <james dot greenhalgh at arm dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, mark at codesourcery dot com
- Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 19:55:28 +0100
- Subject: Re: [C++11][4.9] Add missing REDUC_PLUS_EXPR case to potential_constant_expression_1.
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <51421C32.email@example.com>
- Reply-to: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 02:51:30PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 03/14/2013 09:48 AM, James Greenhalgh wrote:
> >Is this OK to commit to 4.9 when stage 1 opens up?
> Yes, but please add the other new tree codes as well.
I wonder if it wouldn't be better to fold the target builtins only later on
(e.g. guard the folding with cfun && gimple_in_ssa_p (cfun) (or if we have
any predicate that is set starting with gimplification or so)).
Having all the FEs have to deal with myriads of weird tree codes etc. isn't