Re: [C++ Patch / RFC] Fixing a diagnostic regression caused by the fix for c++/56930

2013-11-09 Thread Paolo Carlini
... I think that a much better fix would be calling the second cp_convert with tf_none and make sure the information is propagated down to the c-common code emitting the diagnostic. I'm going to work on it. Note anyway that we still have the option of not calling cp_convert when it's not neces

Re: [C++ Patch / RFC] Fixing a diagnostic regression caused by the fix for c++/56930

2013-11-07 Thread Paolo Carlini
.. nope, p2 isn't Ok, because we would return a different tree depending on complain and . c_inhibit_evaluation_warnings. Thus either something closer to p or something else. Paolo.

Re: [C++ Patch / RFC] Fixing a diagnostic regression caused by the fix for c++/56930

2013-11-07 Thread Paolo Carlini
... well, something like this seems better to me. Only lightly tested so far, sorry. Paolo. /// Index: cvt.c === --- cvt.c (revision 204536) +++ cvt.c (working copy) @@ -621,24 +621,25 @@ cp_convert_

[C++ Patch / RFC] Fixing a diagnostic regression caused by the fix for c++/56930

2013-11-07 Thread Paolo Carlini
Hi all, Jason, in mainline, this commit: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc?view=revision&revision=199232 appear to have caused a diagnostic regression for the following (from c++/43906): extern void z(); void f() { if ( z ) z(); } that is, with -Waddress we warn twice, because in cp_conver