Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. Jakub, does this make sense to you? Do we have a
way of testing for compile-hog regressions?
-- 8< --
The patch for PR91415 fixed -Wsequence-point to treat shifts and ARRAY_REF
as sequenced in C++17, and COMPONENT_REF as well. But this is unnecessary
for COMPONENT_REF, since the RHS is just a FIELD_DECL with no actual
evaluation, and in this testcase handling COMPONENT_REF as sequenced blows
up fast in a deep inheritance tree.
PR c++/107163
gcc/c-family/ChangeLog:
* c-common.cc (verify_tree): Don't use sequenced handling
for COMPONENT_REF.
---
gcc/c-family/c-common.cc | 1 -
1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/gcc/c-family/c-common.cc b/gcc/c-family/c-common.cc
index bfb950e56db..a803cf94c68 100644
--- a/gcc/c-family/c-common.cc
+++ b/gcc/c-family/c-common.cc
@@ -2154,7 +2154,6 @@ verify_tree (tree x, struct tlist **pbefore_sp, struct
tlist **pno_sp,
case LSHIFT_EXPR:
case RSHIFT_EXPR:
- case COMPONENT_REF:
case ARRAY_REF:
if (cxx_dialect >= cxx17)
goto sequenced_binary;
base-commit: 4872e46e080c6695dfe1f9dc9db26b4703bc348c
--
2.31.1
