PATCH to gimplify_init_constructor for c++/38410

Paolo Bonzini
Tue Dec 9 13:14:00 GMT 2008

Eric Botcazou wrote:
>> I don't see any reason to write out an all-zero CONSTRUCTOR to a static
>> variable, and indeed the comment "don't do this for sparse arrays" in
>> gimplify_init_constructor suggests that it's not intended.  So this
>> patch makes us stop doing this for sparse arrays: previously we didn't
>> do it for large sparse arrays, but still did it for small sparse arrays.
> Any particular reason for slightly changing the definition of "sparse" in the 
> process?  If no, I'd suggest going back to the previous one.

I cannot read Jason's mind, but I think that it's because the old
definition "num_nonzero_elements < num_type_elements/4" cannot be true
for num_type_elements smaller than 4.


More information about the Gcc-patches mailing list