On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 3:56 PM, Jason Merrill <ja...@redhat.com> wrote: > On 03/10/2011 04:56 AM, Richard Guenther wrote: >> >> Ugh. Why do we call layout_type on arrays with incomplete element type >> at all? > > layout_type has been called from the language-independent build_array_type > since the dawn of revision control.
Ugh, indeed - now I remember. Something I wanted to try remove at some point ;) >> I suppose the array type is still considered un-layouted after >> that finished (NULL TYPE_SIZE)? > > Yes, layout_type only sets TYPE_SIZE if the element has a size. > >> So, what does layout_type provide >> that the C++ FE relies on when layouting this kind of type? > > Nothing that the FE relies on. It sets the size, alignment and mode of the > array type (if the element type is complete) and also builds the > pointer-to-element type. None of this seems necessary for an incomplete > element type, but it doesn't seem to do any harm either; we need the change > to type_hash_eq either way. > > While looking at the history, it occurred to me that > COMPLETE_OR_UNBOUND_ARRAY_TYPE_P is a better test than TYPE_SIZE in the > type_hash_eq change, so I'm going to make that tweak to the patch; I assume > you don't object. No, that's fine. Richard. > Jason >
