subject:"\[Bug c\+\+\/85535\] bogus code in decl2.c\:decl_needed

[Bug c++/85535] bogus code in decl2.c:decl_needed_p

2019-10-04 Thread paolo.carlini at oracle dot com

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85535 --- Comment #13 from Paolo Carlini --- Any news about this?

[Bug c++/85535] bogus code in decl2.c:decl_needed_p

2018-05-28 Thread paolo.carlini at oracle dot com

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85535 --- Comment #12 from Paolo Carlini --- Not sure about the first decl_needed_p call in emit_tinfo_decl.

[Bug c++/85535] bogus code in decl2.c:decl_needed_p

2018-05-28 Thread paolo.carlini at oracle dot com

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85535 --- Comment #11 from Paolo Carlini --- I meant of course DECL_NOT_REALLY_EXTERN is true.

[Bug c++/85535] bogus code in decl2.c:decl_needed_p

2018-05-28 Thread paolo.carlini at oracle dot com

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85535 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|paolo.carlini at oracle dot com|hubicka at ucw dot cz ---

[Bug c++/85535] bogus code in decl2.c:decl_needed_p

2018-05-28 Thread hubicka at ucw dot cz

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85535 --- Comment #9 from Jan Hubicka --- The code is intended to avoid specializations that are done only to possibly inline the function. When not optimizing this only happens for always inlines and doing so is just waste of effort. In this case

[Bug c++/85535] bogus code in decl2.c:decl_needed_p

2018-05-28 Thread paolo.carlini at oracle dot com

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85535 --- Comment #8 from Paolo Carlini --- It seems that for the potentially interesting cases DECL_EXTERNAL is true but DECL_REALLY_EXTERN is false.

[Bug c++/85535] bogus code in decl2.c:decl_needed_p

2018-05-28 Thread paolo.carlini at oracle dot com

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85535 --- Comment #7 from Paolo Carlini --- I see. Then I guess we need an explicit rationale for doing that, beyond the evidence that we aren't ICEing: the check first blush looks sensible. At least that was the case back in 2014, when Jason quickly

[Bug c++/85535] bogus code in decl2.c:decl_needed_p

2018-05-28 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85535 --- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou --- Yes, I would just remove the entire block.

[Bug c++/85535] bogus code in decl2.c:decl_needed_p

2018-05-28 Thread paolo.carlini at oracle dot com

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85535 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added CC||paolo.carlini at oracle dot com ---

[Bug c++/85535] bogus code in decl2.c:decl_needed_p

2018-05-28 Thread paolo.carlini at oracle dot com

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85535 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hubicka at ucw dot cz --- Comment #4

[Bug c++/85535] bogus code in decl2.c:decl_needed_p

2018-05-28 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85535 --- Comment #3 from Eric Botcazou --- > Looking into it: just matter of using DECL_ATTRIBUTES (decl)? The code is unreachable since the compiler would stop if it was reached.