https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4210
Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |joseph at codesourcery dot com
--- Comment #29 from Eric Gallager <egallager at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Paul Eggert from comment #25)
> I'd like this bug to be changed from SUSPENDED to CONFIRMED, given that it's
> continuing to be a problem (e.g., bug#79479).
>
> Also, I'd like to suggest what I hope is a simple fix. In 2006 Joseph wrote
> "skip_evaluation can't be set for if (0) because you can jump into if (0),
> whereas jumps into statement expressions are not permitted". So, how about
> if we merely set skip_evaluation for "if (0)" when the then-part lacks
> labels? This should be an easy test, as it shouldn't require parsing the
> whole function body. The test might still generate false alarms for code
> containing gotos, but in practice such gotos are rare, so the proposed
> change should be a significant improvement even if it's not perfect.
Joseph, what do you think about this solution?
