On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 11:39 PM, Joseph S. Myers <jos...@codesourcery.com> wrote: > On Fri, 24 Aug 2012, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > >> Hi! >> >> On this testcase, we ICE in optimize_compound_literals_in_ctor >> because init isn't CONSTRUCTOR, but the recursive call relies on it >> being a CONSTRUCTOR. >> >> Either we can add that check as the patch does, making the optimization >> tiny bit more robust (the rest of the gimplifier handles non-CONSTRUCTOR >> DECL_INITIAL of COMPOUND_LITERAL_EXPR just fine), or the C FE would need to >> be somehow fixed to always emit a CONSTRUCTOR. >> >> Joseph, what do you prefer here? > > I prefer the gimplifier approach here (allowing COMPOUND_LITERAL_EXPRs to > use anything that would be a valid initializer for the relevant type).
The patch is ok. Thanks, Richard. > -- > Joseph S. Myers > jos...@codesourcery.com
