From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 82BEC3840C31 for ; Wed, 6 Apr 2022 15:26:55 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 82BEC3840C31 Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-365-IiTtXqp1PoK3lJ1_DoLxdA-1; Wed, 06 Apr 2022 11:26:54 -0400 X-MC-Unique: IiTtXqp1PoK3lJ1_DoLxdA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.8]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E89F6811E75 for ; Wed, 6 Apr 2022 15:26:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (unknown [10.39.195.172]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A0E30C1D3AD; Wed, 6 Apr 2022 15:26:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.16.1/8.16.1) with ESMTPS id 236FQolc1584874 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 6 Apr 2022 17:26:50 +0200 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.16.1/8.16.1/Submit) id 236FQnOT1584873; Wed, 6 Apr 2022 17:26:49 +0200 Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 17:26:49 +0200 From: Jakub Jelinek To: Jason Merrill Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] c++: Fix up ICE when cplus_decl_attributes is called with error_mark_node attributes [PR104668] Message-ID: Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.85 on 10.11.54.8 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, KAM_SHORT, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_NONE, TXREP, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2022 15:26:56 -0000 On Wed, Apr 06, 2022 at 11:18:32AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: > > Why not check at the beginning of the function? > > You just pinged this patch, but I haven't seen a response to this question. I thought the https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-March/592368.html is the response to that. In my =sent I have also a mail which just replied to your > Why not check at the beginning of the function? but didn't contain any patch, apparently that wasn't sent due to some outgoing mail sending issues. But the above mail is a reply to that mail citing that reply and including a patch. Jakub