[15] RFR: 8237894: CTW: C1 compilation fails with assert(x->type()->tag() == f->type()->tag()) failed: should have same type

[Jamsheed C M]

On 17/02/2020 18:04, Jamsheed C M wrote:
> i meant for null object field access or indexed access, the 
> instruction can match across subtypes*  and get eliminated. which can 
> still put us in awkward situation if we try checking exact/declared 
> types, which we normally don't do.
>
> *(as instruction types are erased types)

I meant we do check exact and declared types for some instructions, but 
we may not be  asserting  on it.

Best regards,

Jamsheed