------- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de 2009-07-24 09:02 -------
Subject: Re: [4.5 Regression] Revision 149750 failed
483.xalancbmk in SPEC CPU 2006
On Thu, 23 Jul 2009, hjl dot tools at gmail dot com wrote:
> ------- Comment #9 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-07-23 19:16
> -------
> This patch:
>
> Index: cp-gimplify.c
> ===================================================================
> --- cp-gimplify.c (revision 149933)
> +++ cp-gimplify.c (working copy)
> @@ -804,15 +804,6 @@ cp_genericize_r (tree *stmt_p, int *walk
> }
> }
>
> - else if (TREE_CODE (stmt) == BIND_EXPR)
> - {
> - VEC_safe_push (tree, heap, wtd->bind_expr_stack, stmt);
> - cp_walk_tree (&BIND_EXPR_BODY (stmt),
> - cp_genericize_r, data, NULL);
> - VEC_pop (tree, wtd->bind_expr_stack);
> - *walk_subtrees = 0;
> - }
> -
> else if (TREE_CODE (stmt) == USING_STMT)
> {
> tree block = NULL_TREE;
>
> fixed the problem. Does it make any senses?
Not really. It will break debug information for using declarations.
If you add cp_walk_trees to BIND_EXPR_VARS and/or BIND_EXPR_BLOCK
does that fix it?
Richard.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40834
