On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 3:24 AM, Paolo Carlini paolo.carl...@oracle.com wrote:
On 01/02/2012 02:49 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 01/01/2012 08:10 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
The analysis is confirmed by the fact that the rather heavy handed
patchlet which I'm attaching, which uses copy_node to
Hi,
On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 3:24 AM, Paolo Carlinipaolo.carl...@oracle.com wrote:
On 01/02/2012 02:49 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 01/01/2012 08:10 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
The analysis is confirmed by the fact that the rather heavy handed
patchlet which I'm attaching, which uses copy_node to
On 01/02/2012 08:25 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Bad, because currently many
circumstances in which we do TREE_TYPE (init) = type are in fact benign:
I don't think they are benign. Even when types are equivalent, we need
to convert between them, as several things in the back end rely on
pointer
On 01/02/2012 04:06 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 01/02/2012 08:25 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Bad, because currently many
circumstances in which we do TREE_TYPE (init) = type are in fact benign:
I don't think they are benign. Even when types are equivalent, we
need to convert between them, as
Hi,
I'm trying to do something about this old PR, which I find rather
disturbing: I see what's going wrong - and shouldn't be too hard to fix,
but I'd like to have help on the appropriate way to actually do it.
We have this kind of snippet:
templatetypename T void foo() {
unsigned char
On 01/01/2012 08:10 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
The analysis is confirmed by the fact that the rather heavy handed
patchlet which I'm attaching, which uses copy_node to avoid the
corruption, works. How do we normally handle this kind of situation?
In most cases, trees are unshared at
On 01/02/2012 02:49 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 01/01/2012 08:10 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
The analysis is confirmed by the fact that the rather heavy handed
patchlet which I'm attaching, which uses copy_node to avoid the
corruption, works. How do we normally handle this kind of situation?
In
