This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [C++ Patch/RFC] PR 71169 ("[7/8 Regression] ICE on invalid C++ code in pop_nested_class"), PR 71832 and more
Hi,
[snip the various clarifications]
Il 7 Marzo 2018 17:57:07 CET, Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com> ha scritto:
>My thought was that this patch adds a lot of managing of the flag in
>different places in the parser, whereas looking for error_mark_node in
>the template parms here would be just in one place. But if you prefer
>the current approach, that's fine, it's straightforward enough.
Thanks a lot for the various clarifications above, where essentially turns out that some details of my patch are correct essentially by chance ;) Seriously, I'm thinking the following: since 8 is getting real close, what if, for 8, for the known mild regressions, we go ahead with my super safe Plan B which I mentioned at beginning of the thread, then as soon as trunk branches we immediately apply my patch and we give it a serious spin, say we rebuild distros with it, and see what happens?
Thanks,
Paolo