From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4895 invoked by alias); 27 May 2011 02:30:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 4884 invoked by uid 22791); 27 May 2011 02:30:50 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_05,TW_BJ,TW_JC,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 27 May 2011 02:30:36 +0000 Received: (qmail 29026 invoked from network); 27 May 2011 02:30:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.1.78?) (froydnj@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 27 May 2011 02:30:35 -0000 Message-ID: <4DDF0CC8.8000308@codesourcery.com> Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 06:11:00 -0000 From: Nathan Froyd User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:5.0a2) Gecko/20110505 Thunderbird/3.3a4pre MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lawrence Crowl CC: reply@codereview.appspotmail.com, dnovillo@google.com, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [pph] More C++ Tree Nodes (issue4526083) References: <20110527022401.F1C91222645@jade.mtv.corp.google.com> In-Reply-To: <20110527022401.F1C91222645@jade.mtv.corp.google.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: 2011-05/txt/msg02122.txt.bz2 On 05/26/2011 10:24 PM, Lawrence Crowl wrote: > Index: gcc/cp/cp-objcp-common.c > =================================================================== > --- gcc/cp/cp-objcp-common.c (revision 174301) > +++ gcc/cp/cp-objcp-common.c (working copy) > @@ -99,6 +99,8 @@ cp_tree_size (enum tree_code code) > > case TEMPLATE_INFO: return sizeof (struct tree_template_info); > > + case TREE_BINFO: return sizeof (struct tree_binfo); > + > default: > gcc_unreachable (); > } This does not look right; TREE_BINFO is a variable-sized structure (and is not C++-specific in any event). Maybe you should be using tree_size instead of tree_code_size someplace? -Nathan