Re: RFA: Adding a location_t (or pointer) to tree_exp for 3.4 only.

[Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>]

On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 12:30:34AM +0200, Carlo Wood wrote:
> Now I don't understand your remark because when I add a location
> to every CALL_EXPR by means of wrapping every CALL_EXPR in a WFL,
> then get_callee_fndecl is thus called with a WFL that wraps the
> CALL_EXPR.  That was the whole point no?  To *replace* *every*
> CALL_EXPR with a EXPR_WITH_FILE_LOCATION, so I did :/

Sure.  But previously the code must have been looking for CALL_EXPR
by virtue of a switch/test/whatever.  This is obvious because we 
were not aborting in get_callee_fndecl.  I expect this to change 
not at all.

I would expect wrapping with WFL would not change this at all.  I
would expect that we'd simply call expand_expr one extra time, and
the subsequent recursion on the contained call_expr to do exactly
what we would have done before your change.

So your comment re get_callee_fndecl continues to make no sense.


r~


PS: Your response should include a *detailed* explanation for how
we would get into the situation that you describe.