From: Arthur Cohen Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2023 15:29:56 +0000 (+0200) Subject: gccrs: toplevel: Add comment about running the collector twice X-Git-Tag: basepoints/gcc-15~1575 X-Git-Url: http://git.ipfire.org/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=0a5cc7a4cb2d379f17f75491fae8428dec901e1c;p=thirdparty%2Fgcc.git gccrs: toplevel: Add comment about running the collector twice gcc/rust/ChangeLog: * resolve/rust-toplevel-name-resolver-2.0.cc (TopLevel::insert_or_error_out): Add documentation comment. (TopLevel::go): Likewise. --- diff --git a/gcc/rust/resolve/rust-toplevel-name-resolver-2.0.cc b/gcc/rust/resolve/rust-toplevel-name-resolver-2.0.cc index fbded3e49e18..b9d0bc7c0ac9 100644 --- a/gcc/rust/resolve/rust-toplevel-name-resolver-2.0.cc +++ b/gcc/rust/resolve/rust-toplevel-name-resolver-2.0.cc @@ -43,6 +43,9 @@ TopLevel::insert_or_error_out (const Identifier &identifier, const T &node, if (!result) { + // can we do something like check if the node id is the same? if it is the + // same, it's not an error, just the resolver running multiple times? + rich_location rich_loc (line_table, loc); rich_loc.add_range (node_locations[result.error ().existing]); @@ -54,6 +57,11 @@ TopLevel::insert_or_error_out (const Identifier &identifier, const T &node, void TopLevel::go (AST::Crate &crate) { + // we do not include builtin types in the top-level definition collector, as + // they are not used until `Late`. furthermore, we run this visitor multiple + // times in a row in a fixed-point fashion, so it would make the code + // responsible for this ugly and perfom a lot of error checking. + for (auto &item : crate.items) item->accept_vis (*this); }