http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48031
--- Comment #12 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-03-10 13:04:17 UTC --- > That would work, too. You see no problem with a NULL operand 3 > of array-refs? If you create an array with a variable lower bound, > take its address, convert it to pointer to element type and > dereference that, would it expand ok if it does not have the > element size set properly? At least get_inner_reference seems to > unconditionally multiply with array_ref_element_size () * index, > and array_ref_element_size () does not work for variable-size types > if the array-ref doesn't have the gimplified value. Isn't gimplification supposed to populate this operand #3?
