On Thu, 21 Feb 2013, Martin Jambor wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 01:37:28PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > > > > I'm trying to make IL verifying more streamlined - it's often > > that passes have some random (or no) verification in their TODO > > which makes pinning down issues to specific passes hard. > > > > Thus I propose to unify the various TODO_verify_* flags into > > a single one, TODO_verify_il, and based on what IL properties > > are currently active perform checking. That still leaves the > > possibility to have no checking (with no TODO_verify_il). > > > > Do people think that the fine-grained verification control > > is actually useful or do you agree with me that it leads to > > sloppiness? > > I do not think it is useful and I agree that checking everything that > is supposed to hold at the given time is a good idea. > > Possibly, if you are touching this are anyway, could we (if requested) > dump before verifying so that if verification fails, the last function > in a dump is actually the one with the problem? Of course, all other > TODOs would need to be processed before dumping... but of course that > is just a thought.
Yeah, I put that on my TODO. (it might be that the dumping itself ICEs then, of course ...) Richard.
