From: Lawrence Crowl <crowl@google.com>
To: Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
Cc: reply@codereview.appspotmail.com, dnovillo@google.com,
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [patch] Split Parse Timevar (issue4378056)
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 19:18:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <BANLkTiknZfOLnmO01etkSuUg9YZ07Ai8Hg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4DB34581.50704@redhat.com>
This discussion continues in the thread
"[patch] Split Parse Timevar (rev 2) (issue4433076)"
which has a new uploaded patch.
On 4/23/11, Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 04/22/2011 06:41 PM, Lawrence Crowl wrote:
>> On 4/21/11, Jason Merrill<jason@redhat.com> wrote:
>>> On 04/21/2011 07:17 PM, Lawrence Crowl wrote:
>
>>> That makes sense. Inlines in the class aren't significantly different
>>> from inlines outside the class, but inlines are significantly different
>>> from non-inlines for our purposes.
>>
>> Do you have a quick hint for how to make that distinction?
>
> Check DECL_DECLARED_INLINE_P after we've parsed the declarator.
>
>>>>>> -DEFTIMEVAR (TV_TEMPLATE_INSTANTIATION, "template instantiation")
>>>>>> +DEFTIMEVAR (TV_INSTANTIATE_TEMPLATE , "instantiate template")
>>>>>
>>>>> Why these changes?
>>>>
>>>> Just to shorten the names.
>>>
>>> I'd prefer to keep it in the noun form.
>>
>> Okay. This on in particular was making the output wide.
>
> I wouldn't mind shortening it to TV_TEMPLATE_INST, I just object to the
> change from noun (instantiation) to verb (instantiate).
>
>>> The code is cleaner the way you have it, but not as correct, as there's
>>> some initialization being charged to parsing.
>>
>> Would you prefer moving that initialization out or placing the
>> start/stop into different routines?
>
> I think moving the initialization out would be better.
>
> Jason
>
--
Lawrence Crowl
prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-27 18:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-12 18:50 Lawrence Crowl
2011-04-12 19:06 ` Diego Novillo
2011-04-13 9:19 ` Richard Guenther
2011-04-13 20:57 ` Lawrence Crowl
2011-04-20 23:33 ` Jason Merrill
2011-04-21 20:38 ` Diego Novillo
2011-04-22 0:40 ` Lawrence Crowl
2011-04-22 2:34 ` Jason Merrill
2011-04-23 0:05 ` Lawrence Crowl
2011-04-24 9:34 ` Jason Merrill
2011-04-27 19:18 ` Lawrence Crowl [this message]
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=BANLkTiknZfOLnmO01etkSuUg9YZ07Ai8Hg@mail.gmail.com \
--to=crowl@google.com \
--cc=dnovillo@google.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jason@redhat.com \
--cc=reply@codereview.appspotmail.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).