> 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 ge
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
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
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 c_e
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 c_expr, and for all tree nodes with a location_t, it stores
them in ad
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 c_expr, and for all tree nodes with a location_t, it stores
them in ad-hoc locations for later use.
Hence compound ex
