From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29765 invoked by alias); 5 Jul 2010 13:13:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 29753 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Jul 2010 13:13:08 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rcsinet10.oracle.com (HELO rcsinet10.oracle.com) (148.87.113.121) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 05 Jul 2010 13:13:00 +0000 Received: from acsinet15.oracle.com (acsinet15.oracle.com [141.146.126.227]) by rcsinet10.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.2) with ESMTP id o65DCurw031482 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 5 Jul 2010 13:12:58 GMT Received: from acsmt353.oracle.com (acsmt353.oracle.com [141.146.40.153]) by acsinet15.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.1) with ESMTP id o64MVLIu003651; Mon, 5 Jul 2010 13:12:56 GMT Received: from abhmt019.oracle.com by acsmt354.oracle.com with ESMTP id 381288081278335495; Mon, 05 Jul 2010 06:11:35 -0700 Received: from [192.168.0.4] (/79.52.240.176) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Mon, 05 Jul 2010 06:11:35 -0700 Message-ID: <4C31DA00.5070100@oracle.com> Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2010 13:13:00 -0000 From: Paolo Carlini User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.10) Gecko/20100520 SUSE/3.0.5 Thunderbird/3.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jason Merrill CC: "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" Subject: Re: [C++ Patch] PR 44625 References: <4C31C773.3050000@oracle.com> <4C31D9C7.9000209@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <4C31D9C7.9000209@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes 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 X-SW-Source: 2010-07/txt/msg00376.txt.bz2 On 07/05/2010 03:10 PM, Jason Merrill wrote: > On 07/05/2010 07:52 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote: >> I have this patchlet for another case where we use BASELINK_P on >> NULL_TREE. Tested x86_64-linux. I propose to apply it to mainline and >> 4_5-branch only and then close the PR: it's a regression, but just a P5 >> ice-on-invalid. > Seems like we ought to catch this when we're creating the > COMPONENT_REF, rather than when we're trying to substitute into it; we > shouldn't create a COMPONENT_REF with a null operand 1. Ok, I'll look into it. Paolo.