------- Additional Comments From jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-31 10:09 ------- [resend of comment#6 which did not get emailed out]
The reason I don't consider compiling into an abort to be suitable here is that the problem could in principle arise with more complicated code where the pointer in the array reference isn't immediately syntactically from a non-lvalue array but has been through other assignments, casts, etc., the optimizers then removing these so that at some point an assignment to such an array needs to be expanded. Ultimately I think these cases may most reliably be handled by having the front end create explicit addressable temporaries for every non-lvalue structure containing an array (mapping non-lvalue-struct to *(tmp = non-lvalue-struct, &tmp)), but I think putting the special cases in the gimplifier makes more sense in the context of fixing now a regression we have now. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17855
