Hi again,
On 12/09/19 11:03, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Hi,
On 11/09/19 23:15, Marek Polacek wrote:
--- gcc/cp/pt.c
+++ gcc/cp/pt.c
@@ -26709,7 +26709,7 @@ build_non_dependent_expr (tree expr)
if (TREE_CODE (expr) == COND_EXPR)
return build3 (COND_EXPR,
TREE_TYPE (expr),
- TREE_OPERAND (expr, 0),
+ build_non_dependent_expr (TREE_OPERAND (expr, 0)),
(TREE_OPERAND (expr, 1)
? build_non_dependent_expr (TREE_OPERAND (expr, 1))
: build_non_dependent_expr (TREE_OPERAND (expr, 0))),
Looks like we would end up unnecessarily calling
build_non_dependent_expr three times instead of two: probably is very
cheap, probably the code is cleaner this way but I'm a little annoyed
at this anyway, for the record ;)
Sorry, I misread the code: normally TREE_OPERAND (expr, 1) isn't
NULL_TREE thus we are fine.
Paolo.
