On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 08:04:39PM +0000, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > but you are just adding another term to this expression: > !(TREE_CODE (exp) == CONSTRUCTOR > && bitsize % BITS_PER_UNIT == 0)
No. Please read the code again. I'm adding another case
after this one.
> so the result should look like
> !(TREE_CODE (exp) == CONSTRUCTOR
> && bitsize % BITS_PER_UNIT == 0
> && (!TREE_ADDRESSABLE ...
> || TREE_CODE () ...
> ...
> || (compare_tree_int ...
> != 0)))
Jakub
