Re: Bootstrap failure of gcc-ss-20010409 in ia64

[Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>]

>>>>> "Jim" == Jim Wilson <wilson@cygnus.com> writes:

    Jim> How about hacking the gcc3 branch and leaving the trunk
    Jim> broken?  That way we have a chance of getting the trunk fixed

If you like; that's OK with me.

    Jim> correctly in the long term.  It would be a shame to
    Jim> deliberately modify the trunk to emit incorrect debug info.

Well, sort-of.

We're talking about a case where optimization is involved, and as
laudable a goal as making debugging work well with optimizatio is,
it's unattainable, in general.  The debugger can't really be expected
to print out information about the values of variables that were
optimized away, for example.

The solution you proposed (replicating the BLOCK tree) might be
expensive, and I'm not convinced that's worth the trouble.  It would
be better if the optimizers did not mess up the tree structure; they
are supposed to be working on RTL, not trees.  Perhaps the RTL could
contain the declarations explicitly (via a NOTE_DECL_START_SCOPE
NOTE_DECL_END_SCOPE or some such); that would make it easier to keep
things in a consistent state.

--
Mark Mitchell                   mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC               http://www.codesourcery.com