On Fri, May 05, 2023 at 01:32:02PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > --- gcc/ada/gcc-interface/utils2.cc.jj 2023-01-16 23:19:05.539727388
> > +0100
> > +++ gcc/ada/gcc-interface/utils2.cc 2023-05-05 15:37:30.193990948 +0200
> > @@ -3332,6 +3332,7 @@ gnat_invariant_expr (tree expr)
> > case IMAGPART_EXPR:
> > case VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR:
> > CASE_CONVERT:
> > + case SAVE_EXPR:
>
> I guess doing this would allow gnat_invariant_expr to handle
> DECL_INVARIANT_P that save_expr doesn't know about. But it seems that it
> makes the same assumption as tree_invariant_p_1 about the pointed-to object
> not changing:
>
> > case INDIRECT_REF:
> > if ((!invariant_p && !TREE_READONLY (t)) || TREE_SIDE_EFFECTS (t))
> > return NULL_TREE;
>
> I don't know if this assumption is any more valid in Ada than in C/C++.
I think we really need Eric (as one who e.g. introduced the
DECL_INVARIANT_P apparently for this kind of stuff) to have a look at that on
the
Ada side.
The question is if the posted tree.cc (smallest) patch + 3 new testcases
+ the 7 ada testsuite workarounds are ok for trunk if it passes
bootstrap/regtest, then I'd file a PR about the Ada regression and only once
it is dealt with would consider backporting, or if we need to wait for Eric
before making progress.
Jakub
