Hello YunFeng,
Thank you for taking the time to work on this. I cannot accept or
deny your patches, but I thought I could maybe comment on some parts
of them.
First, IMHO, some of the new plugin events you are proposing to add to
libcpp seem to make sense, at least so that people can write
etags
To Dodji Seketeli:
Thanks, I will republish my libcpp patch later.
2012/6/4 Dodji Seketeli :
> Hello YunFeng,
>
> Thank you for taking the time to work on this. I cannot accept or
> deny your patches, but I thought I could maybe comment on some parts
> of them.
>
> First, IMHO, some of the new pl
Hi Dodji Seketeli:
Is it possible to gcc to accept libcpp.patch and plugin.patch?
I recently rewrite my doc.txt which mainly add a new section , it's focused on pfile.context usage linking to
macro. I think it's important to use cb_macro_start/end callbacks
because most users only care about the
> I'm sorry recent weeks I've got busy
No problem. I am sorry to reply this late to your message as well.
> Later is the response from previous mail.
Please do not take this bad, but it will really ease communication (and
the review) if, when you reply to this message, you write your answers
*b
> But the "meaning" of the macro_end_arg event is really not clear to
> ...
> and so on.
Let's see a sample:
#define Z(a) a
#define Y Z
#define X(p) p + Y
X(1)(2);
With my solution, user get
1) `X' -- leader macro token by macro_start_expand.
2) `(', `1', `)', `(', `2'
Yunfeng ZHANG writes:
>> But the "meaning" of the macro_end_arg event is really not clear to
>> ...
>> and so on.
>
> Let's see a sample:
> #define Z(a) a
> #define Y Z
> #define X(p) p + Y
> X(1)(2);
> With my solution, user get
> 1) `X' -- leader macro token by macro_st
Please allow me to resend former sample:
#define Z(a) a
#define Y Z
#define X(p) p + Y
X(1)(2);
The flow is:
1) `X' -- leader macro token by macro_start_expand.
2) `(', `1', `)' -- macro tokens, by cb_lex_token.
3) macro_end_arg.
4) `1', `+' -- macro replacement toke
Yunfeng ZHANG writes:
> Please allow me to resend former sample:
> #define Z(a) a
> #define Y Z
> #define X(p) p + Y
> X(1)(2);
> The flow is:
> 1) `X' -- leader macro token by macro_start_expand.
> 2) `(', `1', `)' -- macro tokens, by cb_lex_token.
> 3) macro_end_arg.
> It took me a couple of minutes to understand what you meant here, so
> please let me re-phrase to make sure I got it.
>
> You are saying that the callback function of the cb_lex_token event is
> set by the callback function of the macro_start_expand event.
>
> Is that correct?
Yes.
> And this m
Yunfeng ZHANG writes:
>> It took me a couple of minutes to understand what you meant here, so
>> please let me re-phrase to make sure I got it.
>>
>> You are saying that the callback function of the cb_lex_token event is
>> set by the callback function of the macro_start_expand event.
>>
>> Is th
To Dodji Seketeli:
Thanks for you check my patch, I will release it again later.
Yunfeng
Hi Dodji Seketeli:
> This is what I was trying to tell you in my previous message, when I was
> saying:
>
> > _cpp_pop_context is really the function that marks the end of a
> > given macro expansion, especially when the predicate
> > in_macro_expansion_p (introduced recently in trunk f
Yunfeng ZHANG writes:
> Hi Dodji Seketeli:
>> This is what I was trying to tell you in my previous message, when I was
>> saying:
>>
>> > _cpp_pop_context is really the function that marks the end of a
>> > given macro expansion, especially when the predicate
>> > in_macro_expansion_p
Hello Yunfeng,
Thank you for following up, and sorry for me reviewing your patches so
lately. The libcpp changes are coming along nicely, IMHO. I like the
fact that they are getting pretty minimal. I just have a few mostly
cosmetic comments at this point.
[...]
> diff -cpr .pc/symdb_enhance_l
What progress about my patch?
15 matches
Mail list logo
