Re: Status of rich location work (was Re: [PATCH 06/10] Track expression ranges in C frontend)

2015-11-05 Thread Dodji Seketeli
> Talking about risks: the reduction of the space for ordinary maps by a > factor of 32, by taking up 5 bits for the packed range information > optimization (patch 10): > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg02539.html > CCing Dodji: Dodji; is this reasonable? FWIW, I am definitely to

Status of rich location work (was Re: [PATCH 06/10] Track expression ranges in C frontend)

2015-11-02 Thread David Malcolm
On Fri, 2015-10-30 at 00:15 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On 10/23/2015 02:41 PM, David Malcolm wrote: > > As in the previous version of this patch > > "Implement tree expression tracking in C FE (v2)" > > the patch now captures ranges for all C expressions during parsing within > > a new field of

Re: Status of rich location work (was Re: [PATCH 06/10] Track expression ranges in C frontend)

2015-11-02 Thread David Malcolm
On Mon, 2015-11-02 at 14:14 -0500, David Malcolm wrote: > On Fri, 2015-10-30 at 00:15 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > > On 10/23/2015 02:41 PM, David Malcolm wrote: > > > As in the previous version of this patch > > > "Implement tree expression tracking in C FE (v2)" > > > the patch now captures ranges

Re: Status of rich location work (was Re: [PATCH 06/10] Track expression ranges in C frontend)

2015-11-02 Thread Jeff Law
On 11/02/2015 12:14 PM, David Malcolm wrote: Jeff: I'm working on expression ranges in the C++ FE; is that a prerequisite for patches 5-10, or can 5-10 go ahead without the C++ work? (assuming the other issues above are acceptable). Hope this all makes sense and sounds sane I think 5-10 can