Hi David! I will admit that I don't have researched ;-/ what this is actually all about, and how it's implemented, but...
On Mon, 5 Nov 2018 15:31:08 -0500, David Malcolm <dmalc...@redhat.com> wrote: > The C++ frontend gained various location wrapper nodes in r256448 (GCC 8). > That patch: > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-01/msg00799.html > added wrapper nodes around all nodes with !CAN_HAVE_LOCATION_P for: > > * arguments at callsites, and for > > * typeid, alignof, sizeof, and offsetof. > > This is a followup to that patch, adding many more location wrappers > to the C++ frontend. It adds location wrappers for nodes with > !CAN_HAVE_LOCATION_P to: > > * all literal nodes (in cp_parser_primary_expression) > > * all id-expression nodes (in finish_id_expression), except within a > decltype. > > * all mem-initializer nodes within a mem-initializer-list > (in cp_parser_mem_initializer) > > However, the patch also adds some suppressions: regions in the parser > for which wrapper nodes will not be created: > > * within a template-parameter-list or template-argument-list (in > cp_parser_template_parameter_list and cp_parser_template_argument_list > respectively), to avoid encoding the spelling location of the nodes > in types. For example, "array<10>" and "array<10>" are the same type, > despite the fact that the two different "10" tokens are spelled in > different locations in the source. > > * within a gnu-style attribute (none of are handlers are set up to cope > with location wrappers yet) > > * within various OpenMP clauses ... I did wonder why things applicable to OpenMP wouldn't likewise apply to OpenACC, too? That is: > (cp_parser_omp_all_clauses): Don't create wrapper nodes within > OpenMP clauses. > (cp_parser_omp_for_loop): Likewise. > (cp_parser_omp_declare_reduction_exprs): Likewise. > @@ -33939,6 +33968,9 @@ cp_parser_omp_all_clauses (cp_parser *parser, > omp_clause_mask mask, > bool first = true; > cp_token *token = NULL; > > + /* Don't create location wrapper nodes within OpenMP clauses. */ > + auto_suppress_location_wrappers sentinel; > + > while (cp_lexer_next_token_is_not (parser->lexer, CPP_PRAGMA_EOL)) > { > pragma_omp_clause c_kind; > @@ -35223,6 +35255,10 @@ cp_parser_omp_for_loop (cp_parser *parser, enum > tree_code code, tree clauses, > } > loc = cp_lexer_consume_token (parser->lexer)->location; > > + /* Don't create location wrapper nodes within an OpenMP "for" > + statement. */ > + auto_suppress_location_wrappers sentinel; > + > matching_parens parens; > if (!parens.require_open (parser)) > return NULL; > @@ -37592,6 +37628,8 @@ cp_parser_omp_declare_reduction_exprs (tree fndecl, > cp_parser *parser) > else > { > cp_parser_parse_tentatively (parser); > + /* Don't create location wrapper nodes here. */ > + auto_suppress_location_wrappers sentinel; > tree fn_name = cp_parser_id_expression (parser, /*template_p=*/false, > /*check_dependency_p=*/true, > /*template_p=*/NULL, Shouldn't "cp_parser_oacc_all_clauses" (and "some" other functions?) be adjusted in the same way? How would I test that? (I don't see any OpenMP test cases added -- I have not yet tried whether any problems would become apparent when temporarily removing the OpenMP changes cited above.) Grüße Thomas
