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: [C++ Patch] PR 44516


On 05/15/2012 07:56 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
But, speaking of incremental work: what if, post the build_min_nt_loc
chunk, we handle build_min_non_dep and build_min in a case by case way?
Thus we keep around the non-_loc variant and gradually replace each
call? With testcases (small!) checking columns too.

That sounds fine.


Finally, I'm attaching my latest build_min_nt_loc patch. Turns out, in
the light of the better understanding I now have, I can't justify most
of the EXPR_LOC_OR_HERE, outside those for build_x_modify_expr which you
explicitly indicated.

I think I was wrong when I indicated that, and that EXPR_LOCATION is better there, too. EXPR_LOC_OR_HERE is good for error messages, but not for setting the location of a tree. Though it occurs to me that we're likely to use the passed in location for errors as well, so we had better make sure we're passing in a useful location.


Jason


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