Fixing Bug Id 66074

[nick]

Greetings all,
I am wondering why this bug is only for the function reported:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66074
Seems there are lots of other functions in that file that could
use the exact same optimization, would it be better to rewrite
the file to use the void object pointer for all functions that
can use a secondary version for that so this would touch the
function, gcc_jit_result_get_global as an example as it looks
similar enough i.e. same function arguments. Due to this I am
assuming all non error functions in this file should be rewritten
this.

Thanks and I will send a patch if that's the case,
Nick

[nick]

Greetings all,
I am wondering why this bug is only for the function reported:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66074
Seems there are lots of other functions in that file that could
use the exact same optimization, would it be better to rewrite
the file to use the void object pointer for all functions that
can use a secondary version for that so this would touch the
function, gcc_jit_result_get_global as an example as it looks
similar enough i.e. same function arguments. Due to this I am
assuming all non error functions in this file should be rewritten
this.

Thanks and I will send a patch if that's the case,
Nick

[nick]

Post by nick
Greetings all,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66074
Seems there are lots of other functions in that file that could
use the exact same optimization, would it be better to rewrite
the file to use the void object pointer for all functions that
can use a secondary version for that so this would touch the
function, gcc_jit_result_get_global as an example as it looks
similar enough i.e. same function arguments. Due to this I am
assuming all non error functions in this file should be rewritten
this.
Thanks and I will send a patch if that's the case,
Nick

Greetings all,

I am not heard back on whether I should continue or this is the correct
approach to fixing this bug.

Thanks,

Nick