+2001-08-03 Zack Weinberg <zackw@stanford.edu>
+
+ * builtins.c (fold_builtin_constant_p): Return integer_zero_node
+ for complex expressions when cfun == 0.
+ * doc/extend.texi: Document that __builtin_constant_p can be
+ used in data initializers as well as functions.
+
2001-08-03 Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com>
* config/mn10300/mn10300.h (CONDITIONAL_REGISTER_USAGE): Declare
has side effects, show we don't know it to be a constant.
Likewise if it's a pointer or aggregate type since in those
case we only want literals, since those are only optimized
- when generating RTL, not later. */
+ when generating RTL, not later.
+ And finally, if we are compiling an initializer, not code, we
+ need to return a definite result now; there's not going to be any
+ more optimization done. */
if (TREE_SIDE_EFFECTS (arglist) || cse_not_expected
|| AGGREGATE_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (arglist))
- || POINTER_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (arglist)))
+ || POINTER_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (arglist))
+ || cfun == 0)
return integer_zero_node;
return 0;
or compound literal (@pxref{Compound Literals}) and will not return 1
when you pass a constant numeric value to the inline function unless you
specify the @option{-O} option.
+
+You may also use @code{__builtin_constant_p} in initializers for static
+data. For instance, you can write
+
+@smallexample
+static const int table[] = {
+ __builtin_constant_p (EXPRESSION) ? (EXPRESSION) : -1,
+ /* ... */
+};
+@end smallexample
+
+@noindent
+This is an acceptable initializer even if @var{EXPRESSION} is not a
+constant expression. GCC must be more conservative about evaluating the
+built-in in this case, because it has no opportunity to perform
+optimization.
+
+Previous versions of GCC did not accept this built-in in data
+initializers. The earliest version where it is completely safe is
+3.0.1.
@end deftypefn
@deftypefn {Built-in Function} long __builtin_expect (long @var{exp}, long @var{c})
+2001-08-03 Zack Weinberg <zackw@stanford.edu>
+
+ * gcc.dg/bconstp-1.c: New test.
+
2001-08-03 Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>
* g++.dg/eh/filter1.C, g++.dg/eh/filter2.C: New tests.
--- /dev/null
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+
+/* This test checks that builtin_constant_p can be used safely in
+ initializers for static data. The macro X() defined below should
+ be an acceptable initializer expression no matter how complex its
+ argument is. */
+
+extern int a;
+extern int b;
+
+extern int foo(void);
+extern int bar(void);
+
+#define X(exp) (__builtin_constant_p(exp) ? (exp) : -1)
+
+const short tests[] = {
+ X(0),
+ X(a),
+ X(0 && a),
+ X(a && b),
+ X(foo()),
+ X(0 && foo()),
+ X(a && foo()),
+ X(foo() && bar())
+};