From: Thomas Schwinge <thomas@codesourcery.com>
To: David Malcolm <dmalcolm@redhat.com>
Cc: <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>, <jason@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] C++: more location wrapper nodes (PR c++/43064, PR c++/43486)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2018 19:01:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <874lb9qr2u.fsf@euler.schwinge.homeip.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1541449869-59851-1-git-send-email-dmalcolm@redhat.com>
Hi David!
I will admit that I don't have researched ;-/ what this is actually all
about, and how it's implemented, but...
On Mon, 5 Nov 2018 15:31:08 -0500, David Malcolm <dmalcolm@redhat.com> wrote:
> The C++ frontend gained various location wrapper nodes in r256448 (GCC 8).
> That patch:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-01/msg00799.html
> added wrapper nodes around all nodes with !CAN_HAVE_LOCATION_P for:
>
> * arguments at callsites, and for
>
> * typeid, alignof, sizeof, and offsetof.
>
> This is a followup to that patch, adding many more location wrappers
> to the C++ frontend. It adds location wrappers for nodes with
> !CAN_HAVE_LOCATION_P to:
>
> * all literal nodes (in cp_parser_primary_expression)
>
> * all id-expression nodes (in finish_id_expression), except within a
> decltype.
>
> * all mem-initializer nodes within a mem-initializer-list
> (in cp_parser_mem_initializer)
>
> However, the patch also adds some suppressions: regions in the parser
> for which wrapper nodes will not be created:
>
> * within a template-parameter-list or template-argument-list (in
> cp_parser_template_parameter_list and cp_parser_template_argument_list
> respectively), to avoid encoding the spelling location of the nodes
> in types. For example, "array<10>" and "array<10>" are the same type,
> despite the fact that the two different "10" tokens are spelled in
> different locations in the source.
>
> * within a gnu-style attribute (none of are handlers are set up to cope
> with location wrappers yet)
>
> * within various OpenMP clauses
... I did wonder why things applicable to OpenMP wouldn't likewise apply
to OpenACC, too? That is:
> (cp_parser_omp_all_clauses): Don't create wrapper nodes within
> OpenMP clauses.
> (cp_parser_omp_for_loop): Likewise.
> (cp_parser_omp_declare_reduction_exprs): Likewise.
> @@ -33939,6 +33968,9 @@ cp_parser_omp_all_clauses (cp_parser *parser, omp_clause_mask mask,
> bool first = true;
> cp_token *token = NULL;
>
> + /* Don't create location wrapper nodes within OpenMP clauses. */
> + auto_suppress_location_wrappers sentinel;
> +
> while (cp_lexer_next_token_is_not (parser->lexer, CPP_PRAGMA_EOL))
> {
> pragma_omp_clause c_kind;
> @@ -35223,6 +35255,10 @@ cp_parser_omp_for_loop (cp_parser *parser, enum tree_code code, tree clauses,
> }
> loc = cp_lexer_consume_token (parser->lexer)->location;
>
> + /* Don't create location wrapper nodes within an OpenMP "for"
> + statement. */
> + auto_suppress_location_wrappers sentinel;
> +
> matching_parens parens;
> if (!parens.require_open (parser))
> return NULL;
> @@ -37592,6 +37628,8 @@ cp_parser_omp_declare_reduction_exprs (tree fndecl, cp_parser *parser)
> else
> {
> cp_parser_parse_tentatively (parser);
> + /* Don't create location wrapper nodes here. */
> + auto_suppress_location_wrappers sentinel;
> tree fn_name = cp_parser_id_expression (parser, /*template_p=*/false,
> /*check_dependency_p=*/true,
> /*template_p=*/NULL,
Shouldn't "cp_parser_oacc_all_clauses" (and "some" other functions?) be
adjusted in the same way? How would I test that? (I don't see any
OpenMP test cases added -- I have not yet tried whether any problems
would become apparent when temporarily removing the OpenMP changes cited
above.)
Grüße
Thomas
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-12-19 19:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-11-05 19:44 David Malcolm
2018-11-05 19:44 ` [PATCH 2/2] C++: improvements to binary operator diagnostics (PR c++/87504) David Malcolm
2018-11-19 16:51 ` [PING] Re: [PATCH 1/2] C++: more location wrapper nodes (PR c++/43064, PR c++/43486) David Malcolm
2018-12-03 22:10 ` Jeff Law
2018-12-04 15:20 ` David Malcolm
2018-12-04 21:48 ` [PATCH 1/2] v2: " David Malcolm
2018-12-04 21:48 ` [PATCH 2/2] v2: C++: improvements to binary operator diagnostics (PR c++/87504) David Malcolm
2018-12-11 19:52 ` PING " David Malcolm
2018-12-12 20:43 ` Jason Merrill
2018-12-19 23:28 ` Aaron Sawdey
2018-12-20 2:13 ` [PATCH] -Wtautological-compare: fix comparison of macro expansions David Malcolm
2018-12-20 14:29 ` David Malcolm
2018-12-20 23:35 ` Aaron Sawdey
2018-12-04 23:31 ` [PING] Re: [PATCH 1/2] C++: more location wrapper nodes (PR c++/43064, PR c++/43486) Jason Merrill
2018-12-07 19:25 ` [PATCH 1/2] v3: " David Malcolm
2018-12-12 20:37 ` Jason Merrill
2018-12-13 19:24 ` [PATCH] v4: " David Malcolm
2018-12-13 20:38 ` Jason Merrill
2018-12-14 23:29 ` [PATCH] v5: " David Malcolm
2018-12-17 19:33 ` Jason Merrill
2018-12-17 23:30 ` David Malcolm
2018-12-18 20:23 ` Jason Merrill
2018-12-18 20:34 ` [PATCH] v6: " David Malcolm
2018-12-18 20:40 ` Jason Merrill
2018-12-19 15:35 ` David Malcolm
2018-12-19 19:01 ` Thomas Schwinge [this message]
2018-12-20 2:29 ` [PATCH 1/2] " David Malcolm
2020-03-26 5:02 ` [PATCH, OpenACC] Bug fix for processing OpenACC data clauses in C++ Sandra Loosemore
[not found] ` <4a68ec90-456a-cf49-036e-471ba275706c@codesourcery.com>
2020-03-26 14:27 ` C++ 'NON_LVALUE_EXPR' in OMP array section handling (was: [PATCH, OpenACC] Bug fix for processing OpenACC data clauses in C++) Thomas Schwinge
2020-03-26 15:09 ` C++ 'NON_LVALUE_EXPR' in OMP array section handling Sandra Loosemore
2020-03-26 20:53 ` Thomas Schwinge
2020-05-25 10:56 ` [WIP] Fold 'NON_LVALUE_EXPR' some more (was: C++ 'NON_LVALUE_EXPR' in OMP array section handling) Thomas Schwinge
2020-11-26 9:36 ` Don't create location wrapper nodes within OpenACC clauses (was: [WIP] Fold 'NON_LVALUE_EXPR' some more (was: C++ 'NON_LVALUE_EXPR' in OMP array section handling)) Thomas Schwinge
2020-11-26 10:02 ` Jakub Jelinek
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=874lb9qr2u.fsf@euler.schwinge.homeip.net \
--to=thomas@codesourcery.com \
--cc=dmalcolm@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jason@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).