Hmm, I wonder why we need BINFOs at all for the ptrmemfunc RECORD_TYPEs,
which are not classes.
Jason
On 06/30/2014 08:42 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
Hmm, I wonder why we need BINFOs at all for the ptrmemfunc RECORD_TYPEs,
which are not classes.
I'm working on removing both BINFO and TYPE_LANG_SPECIFIC.
Jason
On 06/30/2014 08:42 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
Hmm, I wonder why we need BINFOs at all for the ptrmemfunc RECORD_TYPEs,
which are not classes.
I'm working on removing both BINFO and TYPE_LANG_SPECIFIC.
Works for me! :)
Thanks,
Honza
On 06/30/2014 11:58 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 06/30/2014 08:42 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
Hmm, I wonder why we need BINFOs at all for the ptrmemfunc RECORD_TYPEs,
which are not classes.
I'm working on removing both BINFO and TYPE_LANG_SPECIFIC.
Like so. Applying to trunk.
commit
Jason,
this is another case cought by the type variant checking.
build_ptrmemfunc_type,
for qualified type, first calls itself recursively to produce member pointer
type
for unqalified variant.
Subsequentely it produces the member pointer from scratch - I believe it is
because
the field decl
