C++ and gather-detailed-mem-stats

Lawrence Crowl crowl@google.com
Wed Aug 15 22:15:00 GMT 2012


On 8/15/12, Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@integrable-solutions.net> wrote:
> On Aug 15, 2012 Richard Guenther <rguenther@suse.de> wrote:
> > On Wed, 15 Aug 2012, Michael Matz wrote:
> > > On Wed, 15 Aug 2012, Richard Guenther wrote:
> > > > Prototype below - fire away on bikeshedding names.
> > > Make it mirror the preprocessor names that people are used to,
> > > and do away with the _loc_: __builtin_FILE, __builtin_FUNCTION,
> > > __builtin_LINE.
> >
> > Hm, well.  The following includes documentation and the old
> > new names, __builtin_file_location, etc.
>
> This looks good too me.
>
> A few points to consider:
>
>    * relation of __builtin_function_location to C99 (and C++11)
>      __func__
>
>    * Do we want to update libcpp to systematically expand
>      __FILE__ to __builtin_file_location, etc?

Do you mean just within gcc sources, or in general?  I think the
latter would fail compatibility tests.

> It general, it might be good to avoid too many ways of spelling
> the same thing.

While I'm not excited by the name, __builtin_lazy_FILE has the
virtue of being clear in the lazy binding of the name.

-- 
Lawrence Crowl



More information about the Gcc mailing list