On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Patrick Palka wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 8:50 AM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 2:31 PM, Patrick Palka wrote:
>>> On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 6:48 AM, Richard Biener
>>> wrote:
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 4:00 AM, Patrick Palka
wro
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 8:50 AM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 2:31 PM, Patrick Palka wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 6:48 AM, Richard Biener
>> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 4:00 AM, Patrick Palka wrote:
Hi,
The fix for PR38615 indirectly broke the promo
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 2:31 PM, Patrick Palka wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 6:48 AM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 4:00 AM, Patrick Palka wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> The fix for PR38615 indirectly broke the promotion of const local arrays
>>> to static storage in many cases.
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 6:48 AM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 4:00 AM, Patrick Palka wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> The fix for PR38615 indirectly broke the promotion of const local arrays
>> to static storage in many cases. The commit in question, r143570, made
>> it so that only arrays
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 4:00 AM, Patrick Palka wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The fix for PR38615 indirectly broke the promotion of const local arrays
> to static storage in many cases. The commit in question, r143570, made
> it so that only arrays that don't potentially escape from the scope in
> which they'r
