Re: [pph] Make libcpp symbol validation a warning (issue5235061)

2011-10-21 Thread Lawrence Crowl
On 10/20/11, Gabriel Charette wrote: > I just thought about something.. > > Earlier I said that ALL line_table issues were resolved after this > patch (as it ignores the re-included headers that were guarded, as the > non-pph compiler does naturally). > > One problem remains however, I'm pretty su

Re: [pph] Make libcpp symbol validation a warning (issue5235061)

2011-10-20 Thread Gabriel Charette
I just thought about something.. Earlier I said that ALL line_table issues were resolved after this patch (as it ignores the re-included headers that were guarded, as the non-pph compiler does naturally). One problem remains however, I'm pretty sure that re-included non-pph'ed header's line_table

Re: [pph] Make libcpp symbol validation a warning (issue5235061)

2011-10-17 Thread Diego Novillo
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 20:27, Gabriel Charette wrote: > Yes, I understand that. > > But when the second 2.pph is skipped when reading foo.pph, the reading > of its line_table is also skipped (as foo.pph doesn't contain the > line_table information for 2.h, 2.pph does and adds it when its > includ

Re: [pph] Make libcpp symbol validation a warning (issue5235061)

2011-10-14 Thread Gabriel Charette
Yes, I understand that. But when the second 2.pph is skipped when reading foo.pph, the reading of its line_table is also skipped (as foo.pph doesn't contain the line_table information for 2.h, 2.pph does and adds it when its included as a child, but if it's skipped, the line_table info for 2.h sho

Re: [pph] Make libcpp symbol validation a warning (issue5235061)

2011-10-14 Thread Diego Novillo
On 11-10-13 17:55 , Gabriel Charette wrote: I'm not sure exactly how you skip headers already parsed now (we didn't used to when I wrote this code and that was the only problem remaining in the line_table (i.e. duplicate entries for guarded headers in the non-pph compile)), but couldn't you coun

Re: [pph] Make libcpp symbol validation a warning (issue5235061)

2011-10-13 Thread Gabriel Charette
Just looked at the line_table related sections, but see comments below: On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 4:26 PM, Diego Novillo wrote: > > Currently, the consistency check done on pre-processor symbols is > triggering on symbols that are not really problematic (e.g., symbols > used for double-include guar

[pph] Make libcpp symbol validation a warning (issue5235061)

2011-10-11 Thread Diego Novillo
Currently, the consistency check done on pre-processor symbols is triggering on symbols that are not really problematic (e.g., symbols used for double-include guards). The problem is that in the testsuite, we are refusing to process PPH images that fail that test, which means we don't get to test