From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 81527 invoked by alias); 15 Dec 2016 12:26:34 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 81511 invoked by uid 89); 15 Dec 2016 12:26:33 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-5.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=complete_type, dtrt, sk:comple, sk:!comple X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 15 Dec 2016 12:26:23 +0000 Received: from int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1522A4D688; Thu, 15 Dec 2016 12:26:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (ovpn-116-54.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.54]) by int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id uBFCQJ0p030415 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 15 Dec 2016 07:26:21 -0500 Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id uBFCQH1q004292; Thu, 15 Dec 2016 13:26:18 +0100 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id uBFCQEIe004291; Thu, 15 Dec 2016 13:26:15 +0100 Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 12:38:00 -0000 From: Jakub Jelinek To: Nathan Sidwell Cc: Jason Merrill , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: C++ Patch Ping Message-ID: <20161215122614.GG21933@tucnak> Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: <20161215083414.GB21933@tucnak> <45d11afa-ead4-e605-ae04-9c4b8731289d@acm.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <45d11afa-ead4-e605-ae04-9c4b8731289d@acm.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.1 (2016-10-04) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016-12/txt/msg01361.txt.bz2 On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 07:14:15AM -0500, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > On 12/15/2016 03:34 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > Hi! > > > > I'd like to ping the > > > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-12/msg00698.html > > P0490R0 GB 20: decomposition declaration should commit to tuple interpretation early > > + if (inst == error_mark_node) > + return NULL_TREE; > > This check is unneeded, because complete_type DTRT with error_mark_node > > + inst = complete_type (inst); > + if (!COMPLETE_TYPE_P (inst)) > + return NULL_TREE; I don't think so. complete_type (error_mark_node) returns error_mark_node, and COMPLETE_TYPE_P (error_mark_node) is invalid (should fail TYPE_CHECK in checking compiler). I can write it as inst = complete_type (inst); if (inst == error_mark_node || !COMPLETE_TYPE_P (inst)) return NULL_TREE; Jakub