[PATCH PING] c++-specific bits of tree-slimming patches

[Nathan Froyd]

On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 11:12:01AM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 8:13 AM, Mike Stump <mikestump@comcast.net> wrote:
> > Unsurprising... Â It will never fail during testsuite run, and won't
> > always fail during a bootstrap.
> >
> >> I can't think what the comment would be talking about with pointers
> >> not providing a stable order; I don't see anything that would rely
> >> on that.
> >
> > Â http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-04/msg00161.html
> >
> > has the details of why the code was put in. Â Essentially, the Ada
> > boostrap on x86 linux. Â What's worse is, at the time, it would only
> > occasionally fail, so, a bootstrap that works won't prove anything.
> 
> Well, unless we are not walking a pointer-based hashtable I don't see
> how this matters here.

I can't see the pointer traversal, either--unless there's some subtlety
in how things are added to the goto_queue.

I'm going to leave the code alone for the moment.

> To Nathan: yes, UNKNOWN_LOCATION would be correct.  Whoever then sets
> the label should adjust it accordingly.

Will commit with that change in build_case_label, then.  I will leave
the location-setting to a separate commit, if any.

-Nathan