Re: java/4775

Re: java/4775

[Bryce McKinlay]

The following reply was made to PR java/4775; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Bryce McKinlay <bryce@waitaki.otago.ac.nz>
To: apbianco@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, mlhartme@mlhartme.de,
   gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Cc:  
Subject: Re: java/4775
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 15:10:20 +1300

 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&pr=4775&database=gcc
 
 I'm curious why the second part of this patch is neccessary, but in any 
 case, it would be nice to get this checked in, since re-merging with the 
 latest collections code from classpath depends on it.
 
 regards
 
 Bryce.
 
 

Re: java/4775

[Bryce McKinlay]

The following reply was made to PR java/4775; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Bryce McKinlay <bryce@waitaki.otago.ac.nz>
To: apbianco@cygnus.com
Cc: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, mlhartme@mlhartme.de, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: java/4775
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 16:25:08 +1300

 Alexandre Petit-Bianco wrote:
 
 >>I'm curious why the second part of this patch is neccessary
 >>
 >
 >Last time I checked (some time ago, I'd have to re-check,) proper
 >finals initialization is carried out by checking that at least a ctor
 >in the chain of call will initialize a final properly. So it's faster
 >and prevents things from breaking when regular non static methods are
 >being found invoked in ctor bodies...
 >
 
 But regular method calls can just be ignored, right? They are not 
 allowed to initialize finals anyway. I don't see why TREE_CODE (decl) != 
 FUNCTION_DECL needs to be an error condition.
 
 Also it seems fragile to check explicitly the tree structure of the call 
 (eg the NOP_EXPR etc), because that could change, so why not just do this?
 
 @@ -12670,8 +12665,10 @@
         if (TREE_CODE (decl) != FUNCTION_DECL)
           decl = TREE_OPERAND (TREE_OPERAND (decl, 0), 0);
 -       if (TREE_CODE (decl) != FUNCTION_DECL)
 -         abort ();
 +       /* Skip something that isn't a call to a ctor */
 +       if ((TREE_CODE (decl) == FUNCTION_DECL && !DECL_CONSTRUCTOR_P 
 (decl))
 +           || TREE_CODE (decl) != FUNCTION_DECL)
 +         return -1;
         if (DECL_FUNCTION_ALL_FINAL_INITIALIZED (decl))
           return 1;
         if (DECL_FINIT_P (decl) || DECL_CONTEXT (decl) != current_class)
 
 
 regards
 
 Bryce.
 
 

Re: java/4775

[Alexandre Petit-Bianco]

The following reply was made to PR java/4775; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Alexandre Petit-Bianco <apbianco@cygnus.com>
To: Bryce McKinlay <bryce@waitaki.otago.ac.nz>
Cc: apbianco@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, mlhartme@mlhartme.de,
        gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: java/4775
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 18:44:19 -0800 (PST)

 Bryce McKinlay writes:
 
 > I'm curious why the second part of this patch is neccessary
 
 Last time I checked (some time ago, I'd have to re-check,) proper
 finals initialization is carried out by checking that at least a ctor
 in the chain of call will initialize a final properly. So it's faster
 and prevents things from breaking when regular non static methods are
 being found invoked in ctor bodies...
 
 ./A