sem_aggr.adb (Resolve_Array_Aggregate): Change Is_Static_Range to Is_OK_Static_Range.

2014-07-29  Robert Dewar  <dewar@adacore.com>

	* sem_aggr.adb (Resolve_Array_Aggregate): Change Is_Static_Range
	to Is_OK_Static_Range.
	* sem_attr.adb (Eval_Attribute): Make sure we properly flag
	static attributes (Eval_Attribute, case Size): Handle size of
	zero properly (Eval_Attribute, case Value_Size): Handle size of
	zero properly.
	* sem_ch13.adb: Minor reformatting.
	* sem_ch3.adb (Process_Range_Expr_In_Decl): Change
	Is_Static_Range to Is_OK_Static_Range.
	* sem_eval.adb (Eval_Case_Expression): Total rewrite, was
	wrong in several ways (Is_Static_Range): Moved here from spec
	(Is_Static_Subtype): Moved here from spec Change some incorrect
	Is_Static_Subtype calls to Is_OK_Static_Subtype.
	* sem_eval.ads: Add comments to section on
	Is_Static_Expression/Raises_Constraint_Error (Is_OK_Static_Range):
	Add clarifying comments (Is_Static_Range): Moved to body
	(Is_Statically_Unevaluated): New function.
	* sem_util.ads, sem_util.adb (Is_Preelaborable_Expression): Change
	Is_Static_Range to Is_OK_Static_Range.
	* sinfo.ads: Additional commments for Is_Static_Expression noting
	that clients should almost always use Is_OK_Static_Expression
	instead. Many other changes throughout front end units to obey
	this rule.
	* tbuild.ads, tbuild.adb (New_Occurrence_Of): Set Is_Static_Expression
	for enumeration literal.
	* exp_ch5.adb, sem_intr.adb, sem_ch5.adb, exp_attr.adb, exp_ch9.adb,
	lib-writ.adb, sem_ch9.adb, einfo.ads, checks.adb, checks.ads,
	sem_prag.adb, sem_ch12.adb, freeze.adb, sem_res.adb, exp_ch4.adb,
	exp_ch6.adb, sem_ch4.adb, sem_ch6.adb, exp_aggr.adb, sem_cat.adb:
	Replace all occurrences of Is_Static_Expression by
	Is_OK_Static_Expression.

From-SVN: r213159

1 files changed, 24 insertions, 7 deletions

diff --git a/gcc/ada/checks.adb b/gcc/ada/checks.adb
index d055306..d875cb5 100644
--- a/gcc/ada/checks.adb
+++ b/gcc/ada/checks.adb
@@ -5914,7 +5914,7 @@ package body Checks is
       --  First special case, if the source type is already within the range
       --  of the target type, then no check is needed (probably we should have
       --  stopped Do_Range_Check from being set in the first place, but better
-      --  late than never in preventing junk code.
+      --  late than never in preventing junk code and junk flag settings.
 
       if In_Subrange_Of (Source_Type, Target_Type)
 
@@ -5933,13 +5933,30 @@ package body Checks is
         and then not
           (Is_Floating_Point_Type (Source_Type) and Check_Float_Overflow)
       then
+         Set_Do_Range_Check (N, False);
          return;
       end if;
 
-      --  We need a check, so force evaluation of the node, so that it does
-      --  not get evaluated twice (once for the check, once for the actual
-      --  reference). Such a double evaluation is always a potential source
-      --  of inefficiency, and is functionally incorrect in the volatile case.
+      --  Here a check is needed. If the expander is not active, or if we are
+      --  in GNATProve mode, then simply set the Do_Range_Check flag and we
+      --  are done. In both these cases, we just want to see the range check
+      --  flag set, we do not want to generate the explicit range check code.
+
+      if GNATprove_Mode or else not Expander_Active then
+         Set_Do_Range_Check (N, True);
+         return;
+      end if;
+
+      --  Here we will generate an explicit range check, so we don't want to
+      --  set the Do_Range check flag, since the range check is taken care of
+      --  by the code we will generate.
+
+      Set_Do_Range_Check (N, False);
+
+      --  Force evaluation of the node, so that it does not get evaluated twice
+      --  (once for the check, once for the actual reference). Such a double
+      --  evaluation is always a potential source of inefficiency, and is
+      --  functionally incorrect in the volatile case.
 
       if not Is_Entity_Name (N) or else Treat_As_Volatile (Entity (N)) then
          Force_Evaluation (N);
@@ -6876,7 +6893,7 @@ package body Checks is
    --------------------------
 
    procedure Install_Static_Check (R_Cno : Node_Id; Loc : Source_Ptr) is
-      Stat : constant Boolean   := Is_Static_Expression (R_Cno);
+      Stat : constant Boolean   := Is_OK_Static_Expression (R_Cno);
       Typ  : constant Entity_Id := Etype (R_Cno);
 
    begin
@@ -7148,7 +7165,7 @@ package body Checks is
          if Lo = No_Uint or else Hi = No_Uint then
             return False;
 
-         elsif Is_Static_Subtype (Etype (N)) then
+         elsif Is_OK_Static_Subtype (Etype (N)) then
             return Lo >= Expr_Value (Type_Low_Bound  (Rtyp))
                      and then
                    Hi <= Expr_Value (Type_High_Bound (Rtyp));