This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: tuples: data structure separation from trees

From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>
To: Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>
Cc: Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gmail dot com>, Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at redhat dot com>, dnovillo at redhat dot com, rth at redhat dot com, jayrav at hotmail dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 08:17:46 -0400
Subject: Re: tuples: data structure separation from trees
References: <20070329201635.GA13790@redhat.com> <m3ps6ry13r.fsf@localhost.localdomain> <de8d50360703291840q636fc7a9ocdb2067e62d8d3eb@mail.gmail.com> <m3d52rxs5x.fsf@localhost.localdomain>

On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 09:38:02PM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Provided we keep locations on statements, specifically including
> GIMPLE_MODIFY_EXPR, does it really help us to keep locations on
> expressions within statements in optimized code?  What could the
> debugger do with that information, in principle, that would be
> helpful?

I would worry about any time that two statements are combined and then
later separated, thus losing line information from one of them.  At
the gimple level, that's less likely - in GENERIC or higher, more
likely.  See the PR for a case where the current approach would even
require locations on constants.  And that's obviously infeasible, so...

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery

References:
- tuples: data structure separation from trees
  - From: Aldy Hernandez
- Re: tuples: data structure separation from trees
  - From: Ian Lance Taylor
- Re: tuples: data structure separation from trees
  - From: Andrew Pinski
- Re: tuples: data structure separation from trees
  - From: Ian Lance Taylor

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]