> (1) Try my scheduling barrier idea, where we introduce a volatile asm
> equivalent between the clearing and the normal assignment.  I know this
> is potentially pessimizing, but in practice the pessimization will
> probably be slight.
>
> (2) In the unsafe case, implement the C99 rule by explicitly clearing
> each individual field.  In other words, iterate through the fields,
> clearing all of the fields that do not have an explicit CONSTRUCTOR_ELT.
>
> I think (1) will probably be less pessimizing that (2).  Are you willing
> to give that a try?

The attached patch fixes PR opt/13424 (both on PA and UltraSPARC) and doesn't 
do any harm to the testcase on x86.  OK for mainline and 3.4 branch after a 
complete testing cycle on x86?


2004-03-18  Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou@libertysurf.fr>
            Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>

	PR optimization/13424
	* expr.c (store_constructor): Emit a blockage after clearing the
	aggregate because of an incomplete or mostly zero constructor.


-- 
Eric Botcazou