From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5501 invoked by alias); 5 Aug 2005 18:21:56 -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 5478 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Aug 2005 18:21:52 -0000 Received: from pop.acenetx.com (HELO pop.acenetx.com) (205.207.26.20) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Fri, 05 Aug 2005 18:21:52 +0000 Received: from [68.81.64.149] (account widman@gimpel.com HELO [192.168.1.100]) by pop.acenetx.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.8) with ESMTP id 6838624 for gcc@gcc.gnu.org; Fri, 05 Aug 2005 14:20:30 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v733) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <304646F7-8E0F-4BC6-B054-6E911D5BFCC9@gimpel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed To: gcc mailing list From: James Widman Subject: Template instantiation stack messages "staggered" -- why? Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2005 18:21:00 -0000 X-SW-Source: 2005-08/txt/msg00180.txt.bz2 Hi all, Something about GCC's instantiation stack messages seems curious to me: for a given stack layer, the location in the message is not that of the template instance name that appears in the same message, but instead the point of instantiation of a template instance named in the immediately preceding message. (So the shallowest point of instantiation is always given in a message that reads "instantiated from here".) I can't see anything wrong with this approach, but I can't see the advantage either. (AFAIK, GCC is unique in this respect: there are other compilers that produce instantiation stacks, but for each of the ones that I've seen, each stack message contains both a template instance name and its corresponding POI.) James Widman -- Gimpel Software http://gimpel.com