This is the mail archive of the
java-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the Java project.
Re: PR java/27025: ICE on simple initializer
- From: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>
- To: David Daney <ddaney at avtrex dot com>
- Cc: java-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 18:27:34 +0100
- Subject: Re: PR java/27025: ICE on simple initializer
- References: <17458.40535.399466.5858@zapata.pink> <4432AA7D.4030508@avtrex.com>
David Daney writes:
> Andrew Haley wrote:
> > gcj assumes that in the operation (A + B), where A and B are
> > constants, the result must be a constant. It ain't necessaarily so.
>
> Can you tell my how to reconcile your claim with JLS (v2 or v3) section
> 15.28? Especially in relation to the testcase in the PR.
I don't think it's relevant. Can you think of any place it might be?
> I am not saying that your fix is incorrect or in conflict with the JLS,
> but it seems like a surprising claim.
Well, that's all that matters, surely. I wasn't making any claims
about the language itself.
Andrew.