From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-153682-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 11745 invoked by alias); 3 May 2009 21:17:36 -0000
Received: (qmail 11736 invoked by uid 22791); 3 May 2009 21:17:35 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.2 required=5.0 	tests=AWL,BAYES_50
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 03 May 2009 21:17:29 +0000
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) 	by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60D722BAC04; 	Sun,  3 May 2009 17:17:27 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) 	by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) 	with LMTP id obkiF1p0dspt; Sun,  3 May 2009 17:17:27 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (nile.gnat.com [205.232.38.5]) 	by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2F9B2BABFA; 	Sun,  3 May 2009 17:17:26 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <49FE09D9.4090702@adacore.com>
Date: Sun, 03 May 2009 21:17:00 -0000
From: Robert Dewar <dewar@adacore.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: okellogg@users.sourceforge.net
CC: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [gnat] reuse of ASTs already constructed
References: <1239557374.7565.37.camel@tidbit.site> 	 <1240083309.4554.45.camel@tidbit.site> 	 <1240175954.4554.50.camel@tidbit.site> <1241385654.4763.38.camel@tidbit.site>
In-Reply-To: <1241385654.4763.38.camel@tidbit.site>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2009-05/txt/msg00049.txt.bz2

Oliver Kellogg wrote:
> On 2009-04-19, at 23:19 +0200, Oliver Kellogg wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>> How about not doing the name expansion in-place but rather
>> storing the expanded name in an extra node field?
> 
> I haven't received any reaction on this question yet.
> Perhaps I could reuse the Str3 field instead? (I haven't looked
> into the depths of its usage yet.)

I don't see any room in the node for this extra field ...