From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16290 invoked by alias); 9 Jun 2014 14:46:46 -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 16279 invoked by uid 89); 9 Jun 2014 14:46:46 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 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; Mon, 09 Jun 2014 14:46:45 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s59EkhV6032639 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 9 Jun 2014 10:46:43 -0400 Received: from [10.10.116.21] ([10.10.116.21]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s59EkgMv031858; Mon, 9 Jun 2014 10:46:43 -0400 Message-ID: <5395C8D2.5090103@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2014 14:46:00 -0000 From: Jason Merrill User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Marc Glisse CC: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: PR54442 build_qualified_type produces a non-canonical type References: <5395C387.1010506@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2014-06/txt/msg00727.txt.bz2 On 06/09/2014 10:32 AM, Marc Glisse wrote: > On Mon, 9 Jun 2014, Jason Merrill wrote: > >> On 06/09/2014 10:18 AM, Marc Glisse wrote: >>> I doubt the patch can be wrong, but it may be that this is a situation >>> that is not supposed to happen and should be fixed elsewhere? >> >> Seems likely. What is the difference between the type returned from >> build_qualified_type (TYPE_CANONICAL and it's TYPE_CANONICAL? I would >> expect them to be the same. > > throws purpose >> > > (in what build_qualified_type returns) I guess that makes sense, given that the exception specification isn't really part of the type. The patch is OK. Jason