> > ... In this particular translation unit you mean? > > Yes, in the translation unit being processed. > > > That would be worthless information for decls also reachable from elsewhere. > > It's the information: ADDR_EXPR of this DECL is taken somewhere in the IL, > it's no more or not less worthless than any other information.
Information whether ADDR_EXPR exists on DECL is actually more accurately mainted by ipa-ref code (that is also used to drop TREE_ADDRSSABLE on static vars). Having information whether source language permits taking address of a given object is more useful. > > > So - let's say history is something of the past? > > Maybe, but it's an annoying precedent: no clear explanation for the change, > no > testcase and no audit of the affected front-ends (all I guess). That should > really have been discussed beforehand. It is my fault here - I alwasy interpreted TREE_ADDRESSABLE this way and it seems to work for C/C++ that are the frontends I usually look into. Sorry for that. Honza > > -- > Eric Botcazou
