On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 12:48:42PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 4/19/23 11:26, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 11:20:09AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > > When I was backporting the earlier 108099 patch I finally saw your 
> > > comments on
> > > the PR about the meaning of this pattern with the patch being wrong (and a
> > > regression from 11).  This fixes that regression; fixing the broader 
> > > issues can
> > > wait.
> > > 
> > > Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, OK for 13.1 or wait for 13.2?
> > 
> > I'd wait for 13.2.  We've been burned with trying to rush stuff out at the
> > last minute once this week already ;)
> 
> Fair, though this is much more straightforward than that issue.
> 
> I might revert the previous patch in that case, though; a wrong-code
> regression seems worse than an ICE.

It is wrong code on invalid source that we happen to tollerate, we don't
even know if it is from some real-world code or just some bad reduction.
And I believe in that area other cases just do something that user wouldn't
expect, so I wouldn't worry much about this particular PR for 13.1.

        Jakub

Reply via email to