On 08/23/2018 08:48 AM, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > On 08/23/18 16:24, Jeff Law wrote: >>> >>> Yes, and which one was the earlier, more controversial patch from me? >> >> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-07/msg01800.html >> >> >> Which is the issue I'm working through right now :-) >> > > Okay, please note that a re-based patch is here: > > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-08/msg01005.html > > and if you want, you can split that patch in two parts: > > first: > 86711 fix: > 2018-08-17 Bernd Edlinger <bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de> > > PR middle-end/86711 > * expr.c (string_constant): Don't return truncated string literals. > > * gcc.c-torture/execute/pr86711.c: New test. Yea, I've been considering breaking this down a little. The first hunk in particular is interesting as it touches exactly on the code within Martin's patch for 86711/86714 that has been the most problematical.
I realize there's some possibility that hunk would turn into an assert if the new STRING_CST semantics discussion bears fruit. Jeff
