This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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: [PATCH] PR17544, a C99 and C++ Wunreachable-code problem


On Friday 31 December 2004 14:26, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> Steven Bosscher <stevenb@suse.de> writes:
> | On Friday 31 December 2004 13:43, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> | > Steven Bosscher <stevenb@suse.de> writes:
> | >
> | > [...]
> | >
> | > | My proposed fix is to put a locus on the compiler generated statement
> | > | in the front end: just put it in the current file, on line 0.  Then
> | >
> | > Aren't those loci information used by the debugger?
> |
> | Yes, but apparently line 0 is not written to the assembly output:
>
> Thanks.  I'm just nervous about playing tricks with locus information,
> as it may foul debuggers and tree unparsers...

Yeah, it's not the prettiest of solutions for debuggers.  For unparsers,
I guess it may actually be useful to know that some statement was not in
the original source code, but compiler generated.

> Before I got this mail, I sent a message suggesting TREE_NO_WARNING.
> Would not that work better?

Nope, I wish it would.

Gr.
Steven


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