[PATCH] include MEM_REF type in tree dumps (PR 90676)

Jakub Jelinek jakub@redhat.com
Thu Jun 13 15:54:00 GMT 2019

On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 09:50:16AM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 6/13/19 9:34 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 09:30:37AM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote:
> > > The size of the access above doesn't look right.  The test is:
> > 
> > It is correct.  You have MEM <int[5]> [(int *)&i], which is
> > the same thing as i itself, and on this you apply an ARRAY_REF,
> > which is printed after it, with index j_1(D).  ARRAY_REF is applied on
> > arrays and the result type is the array element type, so int in this case.
> Aah, it's two REFs in one.  I misread the array index as being
> a part of the MEM_REF operand, like this:
>   MEM <int[5]> [((int *)&i)[j_1(D)]] = 1;
> I guess I've never noticed this before.  Why is the whole thing
> not simplified to an ARRAY_REF?
>   i[j_2(D)] = 1;

No idea in this case, though of course there can be other cases e.g.
where the MEM_REF has different number of elements, different element type
etc. from the underlying variable or where the MEM_REF first operand is not
address, but pointer.


More information about the Gcc-patches mailing list