From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jamie Lokier <egcs@tantalophile.demon.co.uk>
To: dewar@gnat.com
Cc: aoliva@redhat.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: C++ ptrmemfun break if FUNCTION_BOUNDARY < 2 * BITS_PER_UNIT
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 05:10:00 -0000
Message-id: <20010406140946.A6027@pcep-jamie.cern.ch>
References: <20010406120452.76EADF28EB@nile.gnat.com>
X-SW-Source: 2001-04/msg00246.html

dewar@gnat.com wrote:
> <<I think that's not the main problem.  The problem is that we have an
> implicit assumption hidden deep inside the C++ front-end, and there's
> no validation anywhere preventing a definition of FUNCTION_BOUNDARY
> from breaking violating this assumption.
> >>
> 
> Well that's a very fair comment, most certainly this assumption needs to
> be documented at the top level, and an explicit check of FUNCTION_BOUNDARY
> as well as large documentation surrounding it is most appropriate :-)

Or just follow the original suggesetion of using a different bit when
FUNCTION_BOUNDARY == 1.

-- Jamie