From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25774 invoked by alias); 14 Apr 2011 14:46:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 25764 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Apr 2011 14:46:10 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 14:46:02 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p3EEjqtU019188 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:45:52 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p3EEjq2o019151; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:45:52 -0400 Received: from opsy.redhat.com (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p3EEjo0O019922; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:45:51 -0400 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id B4F2137831B; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 08:45:50 -0600 (MDT) From: Tom Tromey To: Dodji Seketeli Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, joseph@codesourcery.com, gdr@integrable-solutions.net, lopezibanez@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] Linemap infrastructure for virtual locations References: <1291979498-1604-1-git-send-email-dodji@redhat.com> <1291979498-1604-3-git-send-email-dodji@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 14:46:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: (Dodji Seketeli's message of "Tue, 12 Apr 2011 16:39:22 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2011-04/txt/msg01079.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Dodji" == Dodji Seketeli writes: Tom> One thing to note is that there may be some code that assumes an Tom> ordering of location values. If you hand out ordinary and macro Tom> locations separately (which I think is what is going on), then code Tom> doing this may break. [...] Dodji> Now I think I am left with two options, I guess. Either I find a way to Dodji> make the two kind of locations (those mapped into macro maps and those Dodji> mapped into ordinary maps) share the same integer space and be ordered, Dodji> or, I spot the places in the code that assume an ordering of all Dodji> location values and I change that. Dodji> Is the location ordering a strong property we want to keep? It doesn't matter to me. I think it would probably be sufficient if there were a "cheap-enough" comparison function. Dodji> I haven't noticed that with my tests. But after reading this, I have Dodji> found one spot of the in diagnostic_report_diagnostic that does this. I Dodji> don't know yet if there are other places. Too bad we can't just write operator< :-) Dodji> But if you want, I can just move the the comments to the header file, Dodji> no problem at all. Yeah, please do. Tom