On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 01:16:36PM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> On 05/31/2017 01:05 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> > That is weird, that sounds like a bug somewhere? Which testcase is it on?
>
> I think decomp25 & decomp7 & 8 (sorry, can't recall full name).
> I discovered them because my first attempt had an assert that the incoming
> base was the same as the stored one, for the already-converted case.
>
> It wasn't the case of turning a NULL into non-NULL.
Even that shouldn't happen. NULL should be only for the base declaration,
i.e. the underlying artificial var, non-NULL should be set on the VAR_DECLs
for the user identifiers and should point to the underlying artificial var.
Jakub
