From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15928 invoked by alias); 7 Sep 2004 15:46:12 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 15917 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2004 15:46:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.10) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 7 Sep 2004 15:46:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 17116 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2004 15:46:08 -0000 Received: from 82-32-50-9.cable.ubr07.azte.blueyonder.co.uk (HELO codesourcery.com) (nathan@82.32.50.9) by mail.codesourcery.com with RC4-MD5 encrypted SMTP; 7 Sep 2004 15:46:08 -0000 Message-ID: <413DD79C.1030508@codesourcery.com> Date: Tue, 07 Sep 2004 15:46:00 -0000 From: Nathan Sidwell Organization: Codesourcery LLC User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 MIME-Version: 1.0 CC: Diego Novillo , Richard Kenner , gcc mailing list Subject: Re: References: <10409071402.AA25285@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> <1094568099.21733.44.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1094568656.31576.0.camel@pain> In-Reply-To: <1094568656.31576.0.camel@pain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-09/txt/msg00303.txt.bz2 wrote: > On Tue, 2004-09-07 at 10:41, Diego Novillo wrote: > >>On Tue, 2004-09-07 at 10:02, Richard Kenner wrote: >> >> >>>GNAT.EXCEPTION_TRACES.DECORATOR_WRAPPER (traceback, len) >>>{ >>> system__traceback_entries__traceback_entry___XDLU_0__18446744073709551615[1 .. T.2] & decorator_traceback; >>> >> >>What does this declaration mean? Is decorator_traceback >> >> >>> decorator_traceback_17 = (system__traceback_entries__traceback_entry___XDLU_0__18446744073709551615[1 .. T.2] &) traceback_16; >>> >> >>According to this, decorator_traceback is a GIMPLE register. It seems >>to be a pointer of some kind? I can't parse the original declaration. >>You'll have to figure out why we first think that decorator_traceback is >>a gimple reg, and then we think otherwise. >> >>This may help. Put this test in add_may_alias: >> >>if (is_gimple_reg (var) || is_gimple_reg (alias)) >> abort (); >> > > > This should probably be added permanently under ENABLE_CHECKING.... spelt gcc_assert (!is_gimple_reg (var) && !is_gimple_reg (alias)); nathan -- Nathan Sidwell :: http://www.codesourcery.com :: CodeSourcery LLC nathan@codesourcery.com :: http://www.planetfall.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk