Hi,
On 06/09/2014 04:46 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 06/09/2014 10:32 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Mon, 9 Jun 2014, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 06/09/2014 10:18 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
I doubt the patch can be wrong, but it may be that this is a situation
that is not supposed to happen and should be fixed elsewhere?
Seems likely. What is the difference between the type returned from
build_qualified_type (TYPE_CANONICAL and it's TYPE_CANONICAL? I would
expect them to be the same.
throws <tree_list 0x7ffff660e5c8
purpose <integer_cst 0x7ffff64d6ba0 constant 1>>>
(in what build_qualified_type returns)
I guess that makes sense, given that the exception specification isn't
really part of the type. The patch is OK.
In fact, I noticed today that this is a 4.8/4.9 Regression too. Shall I
try to apply the patchlet to 4_9-branch too and, if testing passes,
commit there and close the bug?
Thanks,
Paolo.
