Jason Merrill wrote on 03/30/07 11:45:
> Looks fine to me. Many places in the front end use build_address rather
> than build1 (ADDR_EXPR) to avoid this issue.
Yeah, I found other cases in Java and in c-*.c. In one case, we are
building the address of a LABEL_DECL for a computed goto
(finish_label_address_expr).
Interestingly enough, mark_addressable refuses to mark the label as
addressable, but we need the label addressable so that it's processed
properly by the compute_may_aliases machinery.
Given that we need to be very consistent about addressability marking in
the FEs, wouldn't we be better off doing this in build1_stat()?
Index: tree.c
===================================================================
--- tree.c (revision 123332)
+++ tree.c (working copy)
@@ -2922,7 +2922,11 @@ build1_stat (enum tree_code code, tree t
case ADDR_EXPR:
if (node)
- recompute_tree_invariant_for_addr_expr (t);
+ {
+ recompute_tree_invariant_for_addr_expr (t);
+ if (DECL_P (node))
+ TREE_ADDRESSABLE (node) = 1;
+ }
break;
default:
Thanks.
