> Oh, yuck -- it never even occurred to me that gcc_assert could be > disabled. I'll bet there are other bugs in GCC due to this very same > problem of depending on its argument being executed for side-effect.
Very likely so... > (E.g. take a look at add_stmt_to_eh_lp_fn in tree-eh.c.) Seems like > lousy design to me especially since proper usage doesn't seem to be > documented anywhere. ... but not this one though. > Anyway, I think the attached patch is what's required to fix the > instance that's my fault. OK? Yes, it's obviously OK. -- Eric Botcazou
