yes, what you said makes sense. thanks,
David On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Jan Hubicka <hubi...@ucw.cz> wrote: >> If you want to flag errors for all possible wrongly used always_inline >> attribute, should this change be done in can_inline_edge_p? Or keep >> your current change, but also add a warning (something like 'always >> inline function is ignored etc') in inline_always_inline_functions >> when inline transformation can not meaningfully give a useful error. > > We have the CIF error codes to be able to give useful diagnostic at > transformation time. I think it is better to have all the diagnostic output > at > one place unless we have really good reasons to fork it. We are not losing > any > precision here, right? > > Sure, other option would be to move all alwaysinline diagnostic into > inline_always_inline_functions and remove the code path in tree-inline. The > warnings however are quite meaningfully places in tree-inline, because we want > to warn only after all the inlining algorithms has finished and inlining > really > did not happen. They can be moved out there if we walk the edges at end and > output diagnostic, but I do not see anything really wrong with their current > location. > > Honza
