Re: [PATCH, obvious?] Some minor nits in string folding functions

[Martin Sebor <msebor at gmail dot com>]

On 07/19/2018 12:04 PM, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> this fixes a few minor nits, which I spotted while
> looking at the string folding functions:

Please hold off until the patch for bug 86532 has been reviewed,
approved, and committed.  I'm making changes in this area,
partly to address some of your comments on it, including some
of the same ones you are making here.  It doesn't help for you
to be making other changes to the same code at the same time.

Thanks
Martin

> string_constant: Remove impossible check: TREE_CODE (arg)
> can't be COMPONENT_REF and MEM_REF at the same time.
>
> c_strlen: maxelts is (signed) HOST_WIDE_INT, therefore
> use tree_to_shwi.
>
> c_getstr: tree_to_uhwi needs to be protected by
> tree_fits_uhwi_p.
>
> BTW: c_getstr uses string_constant which appears to be
> able to extract wide char string initializers, but c_getstr
> does not seem to be prepared for wide char strings:
>
>    else if (string[string_length - 1] != '\0')
>      {
>        /* Support only properly NUL-terminated strings but handle
>           consecutive strings within the same array, such as the six
>           substrings in "1\0002\0003".  */
>        return NULL;
>      }
>
>
> Bootstrapped and reg-tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
> Is it OK for trunk?
>
>
> Thanks
> Bernd.