On Thursday 12 January 2006 13:39, Roger Sayle wrote: > If tcc_statement is the best tree_code_class for OMP_SINGLE, then I > think its reasonable for fold_binary to be more forgiving. > Yes, the OMP_* codes are statements that happen to have optional operands (the clauses).
> Anyone feel strongly for or against the above change? I'd prefer not > to have to bloat the trees we use with non-NULL operands, just to work > around the sanity checks we have. The types of error caught by this > assertion should be extremely rare. > That's my thinking too. We rely pretty heavily on the optional OMP_* operands being NULL in the rest of the compiler. I'll try using your suggestion. Thanks.
