On Sun, Nov 24, 2024 at 7:22 PM Hans-Peter Nilsson <h...@bitrange.com> wrote: > > On Sat, 16 Nov 2024, Lewis Hyatt wrote: > > The size of struct gimple increases by 8 bytes with the change in size of > > location_t from 32- to 64-bit > > Half-way scrolling through the patches, this seems a good time > for a possibly disruptive comment from the side-line: ;-) > > For the size-critical types containing and, affected by > enlarging location_t to 64 bits, would it be feasible to instead > express the location as an index into a (new) array elsewhere > that contains the location_t? If that idea was discarded early > or pursued and discarded, I missed that.
The issue with that is that at least during "build" time we'd likely need a way to reverse lookup from this index. It also feels like if this is possible then libcpp should do this itself (it basically can do this by having all locations being ad-hoc locations). That said, I have not yet seen enough data to say which data structure is most critical here. Richard. > brgds, H-P
