On 12/23/20 1:59 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 09:56:03AM -0500, Jason Merrill via Gcc-patches wrote:
Not exactly sure why we just don't call build_zero_cst (type); for the > scalar
types
I don't know either. Want to test that?
The following passed bootstrap/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux too.
And the function comment even confirms the behavior we need for
build_zero_init_1:
/* Build 0 constant of type TYPE. This is used by constructor folding
and thus the constant should be represented in memory by
zero(es). */
Ok for trunk?
OK.
2020-12-23 Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com>
PR c++/98353
* init.c (build_zero_init_1): Use build_zero_cst for SCALAR_TYPE_P
zero initializers.
--- gcc/cp/init.c.jj 2020-12-09 09:03:38.270054654 +0100
+++ gcc/cp/init.c 2020-12-21 13:51:57.353332652 +0100
@@ -187,7 +187,7 @@ build_zero_init_1 (tree type, tree nelts
else if (NULLPTR_TYPE_P (type))
init = build_int_cst (type, 0);
else if (SCALAR_TYPE_P (type))
- init = fold (convert (type, integer_zero_node));
+ init = build_zero_cst (type);
else if (RECORD_OR_UNION_CODE_P (TREE_CODE (type)))
{
tree field;
Jakub
