On 04/05/2016 05:21 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
On 04/05/16 12:40, Jason Merrill wrote:
It's not clear to me that we really need a TARGET_EXPR for vector values. Since
one element of a vector can't refer to another, we don't need the ctx->ctor
handling. Perhaps we should handle vectors like we do PMF types in
cxx_eval_bare_aggregate?
That may be abstractly better, but we do currently wrap constructors in
target_exprs for vector compound_literals (which is what I was
following). See the get_target_expr_sfinae calls in
finish_compound_literal for instance. That happens for the '(v4si){(0,
0)}' subexpression of the testcase.
Sure, but that also seems unnecessary; vector rvalues don't have object
identity the way class and array rvalues do.
Jason
