From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22429 invoked by alias); 3 Jan 2006 23:01:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 22401 invoked by alias); 3 Jan 2006 23:01:05 -0000 Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 23:01:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20060103230105.22400.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug c++/25632] [4.0/4.1/4.2 Regression] ICE with const int copied into two different functions In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "mark at codesourcery dot com" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2006-01/txt/msg00304.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Comment #7 from mark at codesourcery dot com 2006-01-03 23:01 ------- Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1/4.2 Regression] ICE with const int copied into two different functions rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > ------- Comment #6 from rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-03 22:40 ------- > Patch: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-01/msg00136.html This patch is not OK, but it's close. We should not call unshare_expr on DECL_INITIAL until after the mark_used call, as static data members in templates will not have proper initializers until after that point. Also, there's no need to unshare *before* calling fold_non_dependent_expr. In fact, there's no need to unshare before the return statement at the end of the function. That will avoid creating trees that will only be thrown away later. So, why not just do: return unshare_expr (decl); at the end of the function? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25632