JavaScriptCore/jit/JITOpcodes32_64.cpp:741:36:{741:9-741:35}: error: operator '?:' has lower precedence than '+'; '+' will be evaluated first [-Werror,-Wparentheses,3] map(m_bytecodeOffset + dynamic ? OPCODE_LENGTH(op_resolve_global_dynamic) : OPCODE_LENGTH(op_resolve_global), dst, regT1, regT0); ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ^ JavaScriptCore/jit/JITOpcodes32_64.cpp:741:36: note: place parentheses around the '+' expression to silence this warning [3] map(m_bytecodeOffset + dynamic ? OPCODE_LENGTH(op_resolve_global_dynamic) : OPCODE_LENGTH(op_resolve_global), dst, regT1, regT0); ^ ( ) fix-it:"JavaScriptCore/jit/JITOpcodes32_64.cpp":{741:9-741:9}:"(" fix-it:"JavaScriptCore/jit/JITOpcodes32_64.cpp":{741:35-741:35}:")" JavaScriptCore/jit/JITOpcodes32_64.cpp:741:36:{741:28-741:94}: note: place parentheses around the '?:' expression to evaluate it first [3] map(m_bytecodeOffset + dynamic ? OPCODE_LENGTH(op_resolve_global_dynamic) : OPCODE_LENGTH(op_resolve_global), dst, regT1, regT0); ~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 1 error generated.
Committed r90232: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/90232>
Created attachment 99482 [details] Patch
Looks to me like clang correctly spotted a programming error here, so there was a symptom of this too.
This code was originally introduced in r58991 in JavaScriptCore/jit/JITOpcodes.cpp. <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/58991>
How could this be landed without review, and without a regression test?
I have an answer to my question - probably because it was originally believed that it's only a build fix.
<rdar://problem/9713309>