From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14718 invoked by alias); 6 Aug 2014 15:19:13 -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 14706 invoked by uid 89); 6 Aug 2014 15:19:11 -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 (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 06 Aug 2014 15:19:09 +0000 Received: from int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.26]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s76FJ8UM032321 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 6 Aug 2014 11:19:08 -0400 Received: from [10.10.116.19] ([10.10.116.19]) by int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s76FJ7XC024433; Wed, 6 Aug 2014 11:19:07 -0400 Message-ID: <53E24768.5060002@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2014 15:19:00 -0000 From: Jason Merrill User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Paolo Carlini , "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" Subject: Re: [C++ Patch/RFC] PR 43906 References: <53DFB3AE.1030706@oracle.com> <53DFF100.6010105@redhat.com> <53E010B2.6050703@oracle.com> <53E03A36.5080203@redhat.com> <53E0C4C4.3010101@oracle.com> <53E0C99A.4060003@oracle.com> <53E0CEF9.7020204@redhat.com> <53E0EEC1.2070605@oracle.com> In-Reply-To: <53E0EEC1.2070605@oracle.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2014-08/txt/msg00480.txt.bz2 On 08/05/2014 10:48 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote: > + && (VOID_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (type1)) > + || comptypes (TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (TREE_TYPE (type0)), > + TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (TREE_TYPE (type1)), > + COMPARE_BASE | COMPARE_DERIVED)))) Can we drop this now that we're calling composite_pointer_type? Jason