miyuki added a comment. In D97204#2586111 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D97204#2586111>, @rsmith wrote:
> Thanks for doing this! > > The 8-9% memory hit is better than I'd feared, but still seems uncomfortably > large. I've left comments on a couple of places where I think we could > substantially reduce this. Thanks, I'll try that. > Can we avoid a libclang ABI break if we don't allow the use of 64-bit source > locations for builds with 32-bit pointers? No, unfortunately in some structs libclang stores source locations in 'unsigned int' fields, e.g. CXToken. In CXSourceLocation and CXSourceRange some space can be saved by an extra indirection, so 64-bit locations could fit there, AFAICT. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D97204/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D97204 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
