Re: RFC 214 (v1) Emit warnings and errors based on unoptimized code

[Chaim Frenkel]

>>>>> "SF" == Steve Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

SF> I suspect perl can do a much better job than it does now, but if you
SF> make it a requirement, you prevent many optimizations. I think the RFC
SF> should be very specific about when it applies and when it gets out of
SF> the way.

Expression movement should be attributable to the original line. 
Movement of multiple expressions from multiple to the same opcode,
a small slippage should be acceptable.

But common expression where multiple lines end up at the same point
loses information. But keeping one of the original line numbers
would at least point at the correct expression.

The only movements that I can see are merges and reorgs. And we
can generate a reasonable association to get the users eyeball
to where it belongs.

<chaim>
-- 
Chaim Frenkel                                        Nonlinear Knowledge, Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]                                               +1-718-236-0183