This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH/RFC] C++ FE: expression ranges (v2)
- From: Marek Polacek <polacek at redhat dot com>
- To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- Cc: David Malcolm <dmalcolm at redhat dot com>, Richard Biener <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>, Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 18:07:52 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] C++ FE: expression ranges (v2)
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1446868737-3306-1-git-send-email-dmalcolm at redhat dot com> <1447563717-24429-1-git-send-email-dmalcolm at redhat dot com> <564E3512 dot 9080701 at redhat dot com> <56501A61 dot 6010806 at redhat dot com> <20151121082151 dot GQ5675 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <CAFiYyc2WLXynEPXr1cOE=Me+wposZXXuGuifWDm71oF2heARBQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <1448297620 dot 19594 dot 168 dot camel at surprise> <20151123165754 dot GF5675 at tucnak dot redhat dot com>
On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 05:57:54PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 11:53:40AM -0500, David Malcolm wrote:
> > Does the following look like the kind of thing you had in mind? (just
> > the tree.def part for now). Presumably usable for both lvalues and
> > rvalues, where the thing it wraps is what's important. It merely exists
> > to add an EXPR_LOCATION, for a usage of the wrapped thing.
>
> Yes, but please see with Jason, Richard and perhaps others if they are ok
> with that too before spending too much time in that direction.
> All occurrences of it would have to be folded away during the gimplification
> at latest, this shouldn't be something we use in the middle-end.
I'd expect LOCATION_EXPR be defined in c-family/c-common.def, not tree.def.
And I'd think it shouldn't survive genericizing, thus never leak into the ME.
Marek