[Bug c/102939] Ridiculously long compilation times on (admittedly itself ridiculous) pointer declaration
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102939 uecker at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |14.0 CC||uecker at gcc dot gnu.org Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #6 from uecker at gcc dot gnu.org --- Fixed on trunk.
[Bug c/102939] Ridiculously long compilation times on (admittedly itself ridiculous) pointer declaration
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102939 Martin Uecker changed: What|Removed |Added CC||muecker at gwdg dot de --- Comment #5 from Martin Uecker --- The fix for PR108375 also addresses this issue: https://gcc.gnu.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=gcc.git;h=47821ba07a19b672d3cba351a03af2b122e02213
[Bug c/102939] Ridiculously long compilation times on (admittedly itself ridiculous) pointer declaration
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102939 --- Comment #4 from Gabriel Ravier --- (In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #3) > (In reply to Gabriel Ravier from comment #0) > ... > > #define PTR4 PTR3 PTR3 PTR3 PTR3 PTR3 PTR3 PTR3 PTR3 PTR3 PTR3 > > #define PTR5 PTR4 PTR4 PTR4 PTR4 PTR4 PTR4 PTR4 PTR4 PTR4 PTR4 > > #define PTR6 PTR5 PTR5 PTR5 PTR5 PTR5 PTR5 PTR5 PTR5 PTR5 PTR5 > > > > int PTR4 q3_var = 0; > ... > > Is the use of PTR4 instead of PTR6 or PTR5, intended to provoke comments > such as this one, or are there untold additional related observations? It's just a leftover I forgot to remove from when I was first testing this (with the bigger macros, which just had worse results).
[Bug c/102939] Ridiculously long compilation times on (admittedly itself ridiculous) pointer declaration
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102939 Hans-Peter Nilsson changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3 from Hans-Peter Nilsson --- (In reply to Gabriel Ravier from comment #0) ... > #define PTR4 PTR3 PTR3 PTR3 PTR3 PTR3 PTR3 PTR3 PTR3 PTR3 PTR3 > #define PTR5 PTR4 PTR4 PTR4 PTR4 PTR4 PTR4 PTR4 PTR4 PTR4 PTR4 > #define PTR6 PTR5 PTR5 PTR5 PTR5 PTR5 PTR5 PTR5 PTR5 PTR5 PTR5 > > int PTR4 q3_var = 0; ... Is the use of PTR4 instead of PTR6 or PTR5, intended to provoke comments such as this one, or are there untold additional related observations?
[Bug c/102939] Ridiculously long compilation times on (admittedly itself ridiculous) pointer declaration
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102939 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-10-26 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #2 from Richard Biener --- I guess the code in question could be invoked when the full declaration is parsed and not for each level of indirection.
[Bug c/102939] Ridiculously long compilation times on (admittedly itself ridiculous) pointer declaration
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102939 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- So if you place the variable inside a function, then both the C and C++ front-end take a long time to compile Maybe we should cache variably_modified_type_p somewhere.