On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 2:29 PM, Robinson, Paul <[email protected]> wrote: >> From: [email protected] [mailto:cfe-commits- >> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Eric Christopher >> Sent: Monday, June 10, 2013 4:05 PM >> To: Adrian Prantl >> Cc: Nadav Rotem; [email protected] >> Subject: Re: r183597 - Debug info: An if condition now creates a lexical >> scope of its own. >> >> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 3:56 PM, Adrian Prantl <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > (CC'ing John because he understands the intricacies of LexicalScope >> better than I do) >> > >> > On the first glimpse LexicalScope appears to be a subclass of >> RunCleanupsScope that additionally emits a (DebugInfo-)LexicalScope. But >> looking at the destructors it appears that they have slightly different >> semantics: ~LexicalScope runs ForceCleanup and ~RunCleanupsScope >> apparently doesn't. >> > >> > I'm wary that switching to Lexicalscope in >> CodeGenFunction::EmitIfStmt() might lead to tricky ARC or EH-related >> problems because of that. >> > >> > Does anyone have an opinion on that? >> >> That bit was added here: >> >> commit 495cfa46300979642acde8d93a1f21c9291dac98 >> Author: Nadav Rotem <[email protected]> >> Date: Sat Mar 23 06:43:35 2013 +0000 >> >> Make clang to mark static stack allocations with lifetime markers >> to enable a more aggressive stack coloring. >> Patch by John McCall with help by Shuxin Yang. >> rdar://13115369 >> >> >> and oddly not to RunCleanupsScope. >> >> Nadav? >> >> -eric > > Looks like ~LexicalScope() just wants RunCleanupsScope::ForceCleanup() > to happen before rescopeLabels(). All the right stuff happens in the right > order if you change the RunCleanupsScope instance to LexicalScope. > (RunCleanupsScope::ForceCleanup() does pretty much exactly the same thing > as ~RunCleanupsScope() so it works out. It could be done in a more obvious > way, but functionally they're equivalent.) >
Agreed. I was just curious why Nadav changed one, but not the other. Nadav? :) -eric > And as long as the DWARF lexical scope tag is omitted if there aren't > any actual declarations, I have no debug-info-size concerns. > --paulr > _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
