On Tue, Jul 14, 2026 at 4:40 PM Nathan Sidwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> oops
>
> On 14/07/2026 10:24, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> > On 14/07/2026 03:03, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> On Mon, Jul 13, 2026 at 4:53 PM Nathan Sidwell <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >>> This annoying.
> >>>
> >>> I contemplated just changing AWK to only accept the names at the 
> >>> beginning of a
> >>> line (with whitespace), but then considered just running the C 
> >>> preprocessor
> >>> first -- that way one gets all the CPP behaviour and no surprises.
> >>
> >> Hmm, I'm not sure it's good to open up the can of worms of using the host
> >> preprocessor (is there a CPP_FOR_BUILD?).  Can't you fix the awk script
> >> to honor comments?  Can't we perform what the awk script does by
> >> clever use of C++ constexpr of some sorts?
> >
> > grep didn't find a CPP_FOR_BUILD, but I do agree it's a bit of a Pandora's 
> > box.
> > Here's the earlier approach I mentioned.  It's sufficient to skip 
> > line-comments,
> > which is IMHO the natural way to temporarily stub out a pass.
> >
> > not sure why awk wanted '[[:blank:]]` (rather than `[:blank:]`, but one awk
> > complained and the other didn't
> >
> > I'm just looking for a simple solution here, not reengineer things with 
> > exciting
> > C++
> >
> > ok?

The gen-pass-instances.awk change looks OK.  I find the Makefile change
just obfuscates things, I can no longer see what happens, so NACK from
my side for that part.

Richard.

> > nathan
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Nathan Sidwell

Reply via email to