Re: [RFH / Patch] PR 51222

[Paolo Carlini <paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com>]

On 05/01/2012 10:06 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> I'm not 100% sure to understand the last two comments. I'm removing 
> completely the latter cases and changing the former like the below. 
> Note that the way I handle fn in walk_template_parms implies that when 
> check_types is true then pfd->fn is always NULL in  
> walk_template_parms_r.
The below is a variant which uses pfd->check_types for INDIRECT_REF and 
COMPONENT_REF, consistently with other cases above and of course also works.

In fact, the reason why I'm still a bit confused about some of the cases 
of this switch, is that I'm not sure to understand what it could mean to 
call walk_template_parms with fn NULL and check_types false.

Paolo.

////////////////////////

Attachment: patch_51222_5b
Description: Text document