On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 05:26:59PM -0400, Marek Polacek wrote:
> @@ -1441,11 +1406,13 @@ static tree
> replace_placeholders_for_class_temp_r (tree *tp, int *, void *data)
> {
> tree t = *tp;
> - tree full_expr = *static_cast<tree *>(data);
> + auto pset = static_cast<hash_set<tree> *>(data);
>
> /* We're looking for a TARGET_EXPR nested in the whole expression. */
> if (TREE_CODE (t) == TARGET_EXPR
> - && !potential_prvalue_result_of (t, full_expr))
> + /* That serves as temporary materialization, not an initializer. */
> + && !TARGET_EXPR_ELIDING_P (t)
> + && !pset->add (t))
> {
> tree init = TARGET_EXPR_INITIAL (t);
> while (TREE_CODE (init) == COMPOUND_EXPR)
> @@ -1460,6 +1427,16 @@ replace_placeholders_for_class_temp_r (tree *tp, int
> *, void *data)
> gcc_checking_assert (!find_placeholders (init));
> }
> }
> + /* TARGET_EXPRs initializing function arguments are not marked as eliding,
> + even though gimplify_arg drops them on the floor. Don't go replacing
> + placeholders in them. */
> + else if (TREE_CODE (t) == CALL_EXPR || TREE_CODE (t) == AGGR_INIT_EXPR)
> + for (int i = 0; i < call_expr_nargs (t); ++i)
> + {
> + tree arg = get_nth_callarg (t, i);
> + if (TREE_CODE (arg) == TARGET_EXPR)
I just realized this could also check !TARGET_EXPR_ELIDING_P; there's no point
to adding an eliding TARGET_EXPR into the pset.
> + pset->add (arg);
> + }
Marek
