On Tue, Apr 19, 2022, 6:53 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2022 at 09:57:12AM -0400, Patrick Palka wrote:
> > > Hmm, Patrick made a similar change and then reverted it for PR90996.
> > > But it makes sense to me; when we replace placeholders, it's
> appropriate
> > > to look at the
On Mon, Apr 18, 2022 at 09:57:12AM -0400, Patrick Palka wrote:
> > Hmm, Patrick made a similar change and then reverted it for PR90996.
> > But it makes sense to me; when we replace placeholders, it's appropriate
> > to look at the whole aggregate initialization rather than the innermost
> >
On Sun, Apr 17, 2022 at 6:24 PM Jason Merrill wrote:
>
> On 4/15/22 07:22, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > The CONSTRUCTOR_PLACEHOLDER_BOUNDARY bit is supposed to separate
> > PLACEHOLDER_EXPRs that should be replaced by one object or subobjects of it
> > (variable, TARGET_EXPR slot, ...)
On 4/15/22 07:22, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
The CONSTRUCTOR_PLACEHOLDER_BOUNDARY bit is supposed to separate
PLACEHOLDER_EXPRs that should be replaced by one object or subobjects of it
(variable, TARGET_EXPR slot, ...) from other PLACEHOLDER_EXPRs that should
be replaced by different objects or
Hi!
The CONSTRUCTOR_PLACEHOLDER_BOUNDARY bit is supposed to separate
PLACEHOLDER_EXPRs that should be replaced by one object or subobjects of it
(variable, TARGET_EXPR slot, ...) from other PLACEHOLDER_EXPRs that should
be replaced by different objects or subobjects.
The bit is set when finding
