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: [C++ Patch] Fixes for duplicate warnings regressions [1/2]

On 11/23/2013 08:12 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 11/10/2013 05:26 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
this is the issue with -Waddress caused by the fix for c++/56930. I'm
handling it as already described, that is by adding a bool parameter to

Why not handle this by making that warning respect c_inhibit_evaluation_warnings?

Good question, but it doesn't work, in the sense that we can't simply protect the warning itself with "c_inhibit_evaluation_warnings == 0" (per the attached) and bump the global around the second cp_convert, because then we don't warn *at all*. The reason being that with the *first* cp_convert we end up calling c_common_truthvalue_conversion with c_inhibit_evaluation_warnings bumped. The bumping happens in cp_truthvalue_conversion. A mess, yes. At this Stage, if we don't feel like going with something like my last try or something even less straightforward reworking the way we bump c_inhibit_evaluation_warnings in the various circumstances, I'm tempted to go back to my first try:

-      tree folded_result = cp_convert (type, folded, complain);
+      tree folded_result
+	= folded != expr ? cp_convert (type, folded, complain) : result;

Would it be safe? I mean, is it at all possible that folded == expr and in fact we should call again cp_convert? Because otherwise it's also a (minor) optimization and radically avoids the problem.


Attachment: p
Description: Text document

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