public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "mark at codesourcery dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/20103] [4.0/4.1 regression] ICE in create_tmp_var with C99 style struct initializer Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 23:30:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20050304233004.22464.qmail@sourceware.org> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20050220111234.20103.falk@debian.org> ------- Additional Comments From mark at codesourcery dot com 2005-03-04 23:29 ------- Subject: Re: [PR c++/20103] failure to gimplify constructors for addressable types Alexandre Oliva wrote: > On Mar 3, 2005, Andrew Pinski <pinskia@physics.uc.edu> wrote: > > >>I think this is the wrong approach. The front-end and not >>the gimplifier should be creating these temporaries, I mentioned >>this already in the bug. > > > How about this? > > I tried with the TARGET_EXPR by itself, but it failed to be recognized > as an lvalue, so I introduced the compound expr. Introducing a TARGET_EXPR makes sense to me. > Testing on x86_64-linux-gnu. Ok to install if it passes? > + foo ((B){x}); I don't think (B){x} should be an lvalue, C99 notwithstanding. B(3) is not be an lavalue; I don't see why "(B){x}" should be. Conceptually, the compound-literal syntax is just a way of invoking an imaginary constuctor that has an argument corresponding to each non-static data member. Has there been any discussion of this in the ISO committee? Or prior are in other compilers? Including previous versions of G++? (These are not rhetorical questions; I really don't know.) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20103
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-03-04 23:30 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2005-02-20 17:37 [Bug c++/20103] New: [4.0 regression] ICE in create_tmp_var falk at debian dot org 2005-02-20 17:52 ` [Bug c++/20103] " falk at debian dot org 2005-02-20 19:02 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-20 19:25 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-20 19:27 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-21 21:49 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-23 11:10 ` [Bug c++/20103] [4.0 regression] ICE in create_tmp_var with C99 style struct initializer pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-02 13:48 ` [Bug c++/20103] [4.0/4.1 " reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-03 7:01 ` aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-03 7:42 ` aoliva at redhat dot com 2005-03-04 23:22 ` aoliva at redhat dot com 2005-03-04 23:30 ` mark at codesourcery dot com [this message] 2005-03-05 11:41 ` giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-03-05 12:16 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com 2005-03-05 13:37 ` aoliva at redhat dot com 2005-03-05 14:03 ` aoliva at redhat dot com 2005-03-05 21:47 ` mark at codesourcery dot com 2005-03-06 7:30 ` aoliva at redhat dot com 2005-03-06 18:02 ` mark at codesourcery dot com 2005-03-07 3:26 ` aoliva at redhat dot com 2005-03-07 4:44 ` mark at codesourcery dot com 2005-03-07 8:51 ` giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-03-07 14:44 ` aoliva at redhat dot com 2005-03-07 16:05 ` mark at codesourcery dot com 2005-03-07 17:05 ` aoliva at redhat dot com 2005-03-07 18:05 ` mark at codesourcery dot com 2005-03-07 21:58 ` aoliva at redhat dot com 2005-03-07 22:39 ` mark at codesourcery dot com 2005-03-08 7:25 ` aoliva at redhat dot com 2005-03-08 7:46 ` mark at codesourcery dot com 2005-03-08 20:44 ` aoliva at redhat dot com 2005-03-08 21:55 ` aoliva at redhat dot com 2005-03-11 15:20 ` rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-11 19:29 ` aoliva at redhat dot com 2005-03-17 10:42 ` aoliva at redhat dot com 2005-03-17 11:49 ` rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-18 5:39 ` aoliva at redhat dot com 2005-03-18 10:16 ` aoliva at redhat dot com 2005-04-02 17:27 ` aoliva at redhat dot com 2005-04-05 14:47 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-17 3:57 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-17 3:59 ` aoliva at redhat dot com 2005-04-17 4:03 ` mark at codesourcery dot com 2005-04-17 6:25 ` aoliva at redhat dot com 2005-07-06 17:03 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-22 21:12 ` steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-27 16:18 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org [not found] <bug-20103-2744@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> 2005-10-13 20:06 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-14 14:37 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-31 2:44 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-25 20:26 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-09 9:57 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-10 22:23 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-03 23:52 ` tbm at cyrius dot com 2007-02-14 9:05 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20050304233004.22464.qmail@sourceware.org \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).