On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 2:00 AM, Patrick R. Michaud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 02:31:58AM +0100, Jonathan Worthington wrote: > > Oh, argh, so .line now carries the file *and* the line number?.I wanted > > it to just carry the line number (the clue's in the name... ;-)) and > > have .file carry the filename. Then the source you compiled from one > > file has one ".file 'foo.pir'" directive, and then you just have ".line > > 42" style things for lines. > > Either way works for me -- PCT can generate either without much > difficulty. It probably makes more sense to have separate .file > and .line directives. In particular, I wouldn't want to be > repeating the .file annotation information throughout the bytecode! :-) > well, I guess that's two +1's for the proposal in RT#59830 :-) kjs
