On Wed, 22 Apr 2020, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 11:45:19AM +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote: > > Given what was said on irc about DECL_NAME not necessarily being > > significant for DECL_ARTIFICIAL decls, would it be better to drop > > this part of the check? > > My preference was have it as narrow as possible for the time being, > because we are shortly before release. > We can replace it with an assertion or whatever later. > Perhaps even the predicate should check for non-NULL and non-zero > TYPE_SIZE (TREE_TYPE (field)).
Btw, do we ever have more than one of those? The predicate doesn't check if the field is the "first" one (does it reliably appear before non-FIELD_DECLs and thus is it always == TYPE_FIELDS (DECL_CONTEXT (field))?) Richard.
