On Sat, Feb 15, 2025 at 04:52:58PM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 2/12/25 2:22 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> >
> > Or just go with that even for GCC 15 (completely untested and dunno if
> > something needs to be done about s = NULL passed to query or not) for
> > now, with the advantage that it can do something even for the cases where
> > type is not compatible with types of arguments, and perhaps add additional
> > cases later?
> I added the check for s being non-null and made a trivial fix to your patch
> (IIRC you used "code" when it should have been "subcode").
>
> Do you think there's still value in opening a new non-regression bug for
> additional cases?
I actually can't think of any further cases right now, so I think no need to
open a PR, just commit the patch ;)
Jakub
