This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: RFA: Adding a location_t (or pointer) to tree_exp for 3.4 only.
- From: Carlo Wood <carlo at alinoe dot com>
- To: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Cc: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>, wilson at specifixinc dot com, jason at redhat dot com
- Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2003 21:08:17 +0200
- Subject: Re: RFA: Adding a location_t (or pointer) to tree_exp for 3.4 only.
- References: <20030922001710.GA24248@alinoe.com> <20030927124920.GA16447@alinoe.com> <20031006174054.GC17794@redhat.com>
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 10:40:54AM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> What leads you to believe that this is true? Why would not the
> WFL expr just go through expand_expr, and thence to expand_call?
Most code is simply assuming that if an expression is not
a CALL_EXP it is not a call - while a CALL_EXP wrapped in
a WFL *would* be a call. There is no automatic unwrapping
done due to how expressions are handled at all places;
I ran into a few cases where actually was tested for CALL_EXP
while at that moment it was my WFL containing the CALL_EXP
and then, when talking to Daniel Berlin on IRC he told me
that the same approach has been tried on tree-ssa, giving
rise to the need for a macro STRIP_WFL at all those places.
Because of this past experience with tree-ssa on the same
subject, it seemed not necessary to investigate this further.
--
Carlo Wood <carlo@alinoe.com>