gcc3 vs 176.gcc

[Richard Henderson]

On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 12:28:36PM -0800, Joe Buck wrote:
> I think that the check happens too late if it is done this way.
> Better to detect that the rules are broken at the time of tree->RTL
> conversion.

Yes, this is nice, but,

> and note that the type of rt is not pointer to (possibly cv-qualified)
> int or unsigned, we know already that the rules have been broken,
> independent of what the backend is.

As soon as you start breaking up the expression into multiple
variables, we'll lose this overall view.


r~