https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99349
--- Comment #4 from Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu> --- On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 06:45:25PM +0000, anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99349 > > anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: > > What |Removed |Added > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > CC| |anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org > > --- Comment #3 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- > (In reply to kargl from comment #1) > > Tested against original code. Not regression tested. > > Steve, your patch appears to regtest ok. However, from a error recovery > point of view, I wonder if this modification is the right way to go. > Since you authored the code segment in question, you might know better > than me what is intended. > I honestly don't remember the "why's" behind that code. pault did much of the inquiry implementation, and Gerhard found ways to break his implementation. I know I fixed a few corner cases, and this is likely one of those. The function is match_data_constant(), so we're looking for a constant. My patch simply removes the type checking as it is unimportant here, and a type mismatch between a data-object and data-value is checked elsewhere. I suspect my original code was being too cautious with type checks. If your patch leads to a better error message(s), then by all means use your patch.
