From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3155 invoked by alias); 6 Oct 2003 20:14:25 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 3148 invoked from network); 6 Oct 2003 20:14:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 6 Oct 2003 20:14:24 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.22 #1 (Debian)) id 1A6bkN-0002dI-Te; Mon, 06 Oct 2003 16:14:23 -0400 Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2003 20:14:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Richard Henderson , wilson@specifixinc.com, jason@redhat.com Subject: Re: RFA: Adding a location_t (or pointer) to tree_exp for 3.4 only. Message-ID: <20031006201423.GA10085@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, Richard Henderson , wilson@specifixinc.com, jason@redhat.com References: <20030922001710.GA24248@alinoe.com> <20030927124920.GA16447@alinoe.com> <20031006174054.GC17794@redhat.com> <20031006190817.GA9460@alinoe.com> <20031006201102.GA5019@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20031006201102.GA5019@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-10/txt/msg00173.txt.bz2 On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 01:11:02PM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote: > On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 09:08:17PM +0200, Carlo Wood wrote: > > Most code is simply assuming that if an expression is not > > a CALL_EXP it is not a call - while a CALL_EXP wrapped in > > a WFL *would* be a call. > > That is a specious argument. How does this differ from a > PLUS_EXPR that contains a call? A number of places continue to recurse on the arguments of a PLUS_EXPR but do not handle EXPR_WITH_FILE_LOCATION, for one thing. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer