This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: enable-checking: error_mark accessed as type
>>>>> Martin v Loewis <email@example.com> writes:
>> I especially have a problem with creating ERROR_MARK nodes that
>> are not error_mark_node.
>> Basically, I think we need a cleaner solution to this problem. How does
>> the C frontend deal with this issue?
> I assume they don't have such problems.
No, grokdeclarator puts error_mark_node into TREE_TYPE of decls in C, too.
> The specific problem with build_dummy_object is that it is passed to
> integer_zerop. That could be solved by extending STRIP_NOP to expect
> error_mark_node, or by not putting ERROR_MARKs into your dummy objects.
> I don't understand why the dummy object *has* to have an
> error_mark_node inside, it seems any recognizable pattern would do.
Yes, so long as it can't get there normally. How about using
> Other than that, my patch does not produce new ERROR_MARKs. As for
> checking for both error_mark and error_type: Based on the current test
> suite, this only rarely has to be done. If we put an error_mark into a
> type, we *already* printed an error message. The code just has to get
> through somehow, for error stabilization.
Yep; that's what it means other places, too. I'd rather just fix the
places that don't currently check for TREE_TYPE == error_mark_node. Mark,
do you have any input?