From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20916 invoked by alias); 5 Mar 2010 19:38:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 20907 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Mar 2010 19:38:28 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RDNS_NONE X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from Unknown (HELO smtp1.bol.co.tz) (196.1.53.22) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 05 Mar 2010 19:38:21 +0000 Received: from ars.bol.co.tz (mail.bol.co.tz [196.1.52.2]) by smtp1.bol.co.tz (Spam & Virus Firewall) with ESMTP id 63AAE52904C for ; Fri, 5 Mar 2010 22:38:09 +0300 (EAT) Received: from ars.bol.co.tz (mail.bol.co.tz [196.1.52.2]) by smtp1.bol.co.tz with ESMTP id ZKxaMziAIBVWQKmL for ; Fri, 05 Mar 2010 22:38:09 +0300 (EAT) Received: (qmail 22515 invoked from network); 5 Mar 2010 22:38:06 +0300 Received: from host52-48.bol.co.tz (HELO ?192.168.1.100?) (196.1.52.48) by mail.bol.co.tz with SMTP; 5 Mar 2010 22:38:05 +0300 Subject: gimplify.c - missing tree codes From: Steve Teale To: gcc-help Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2010 19:38:00 -0000 Message-ID: <1267817886.20422.4.camel@Ubuntu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-help-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-help-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2010-03/txt/msg00088.txt.bz2 In 4.3.4,the switch in function gimplify_expr(...) included: case STATIC_CHAIN_EXPR: /* The argument is used as information only. No need to gimplify */ case STATIC_CHAIN_DECL: ret = GS_ALL_DONE; break; 4.4.3 does not mention these codes, so any front end that generates them fails at a later catch-all with an Internal compiler error. What was the rationale for removing them? Is it a big deal to put them back? Thanks Steve