Hi, On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 09:18:22PM -0400, David Malcolm wrote: > gcc/ > > Explicitly number the instances of passes within passes.def. > > This is needed by a subsequent patch so that we can create > fields within the pipeline class for each pass instance (to help > locate pass instances when debugging). >
I don't really understand what you want to achieve. Are you sure the benefits are worth the work necessary to implement the processing of passes.def.in? Especially given that we already initialize static_pass_number at run time and copy stuff around in make_pass_instance when it is already set. I assume this would somehow allow us to directly dump data of say forwprop3 as apposed to forwprop2 to but that would require constant awareness of the sequence number of the currently running pass, which I think is also unpleasant and error-prone. I mean, you may have perfectly legitimate reasons for doing this, I'm just wondering whether we are perhaps over-engineering this a bit. Thanks, Martin
