code review 5432082: gc: keep pointer to original node in constant rewrites.

gc: keep pointer to original node in constant rewrites.

This allows printing meaningful expressions in error messages
instead of evaluated constants.
Fixes issue 2276.

[remyoudompheng, 2011-11-26 11:52:48]

Hello golang-dev@googlegroups.com (cc: golang-dev@googlegroups.com,
remy@archlinux.org),

I'd like you to review this change to
https://go.googlecode.com/hg/

[remyoudompheng, 2011-11-26 11:57:00]

Hello golang-dev@googlegroups.com (cc: golang-dev@googlegroups.com,
remy@archlinux.org),

Please take another look.

[remyoudompheng, 2011-11-26 12:00:11]

On 2011/11/26 11:57:00, remyoudompheng wrote:
> Hello mailto:golang-dev@googlegroups.com (cc:
mailto:golang-dev@googlegroups.com,
> mailto:remy@archlinux.org),
> 
> Please take another look.

Sorry for the spam, I wanted to add another file test/fixedbugs/bug378.go but I
don't understand how to do it with Mercurial.

Rémy.

[remyoudompheng, 2011-11-26 12:08:46]

Hello golang-dev@googlegroups.com (cc: golang-dev@googlegroups.com,
remy@archlinux.org),

Please take another look.

[remyoudompheng, 2011-11-28 18:21:48]

Hello golang-dev@googlegroups.com (cc: golang-dev@googlegroups.com,
remy@archlinux.org),

Please take another look.

[rsc, 2011-11-28 18:31:08]

This looks fine, but I expected the error for bug379.go
to now say "1+2 not used", but it still says "3 not used".

Russ

[remyoudompheng, 2011-11-28 18:43:48]

On 2011/11/28 18:31:08, rsc wrote:
> This looks fine, but I expected the error for bug379.go
> to now say "1+2 not used", but it still says "3 not used".
> 
> Russ

The "3" instead of "1+2" comes from evconst() in const.c. I have prepared a
patch for the "1+2" too, do you want me to merge it with this CL? I would have
to edit the description.

Rémy.

[remyoudompheng, 2011-11-28 18:50:27]

Hello golang-dev@googlegroups.com, rsc@golang.org (cc:
golang-dev@googlegroups.com, remy@archlinux.org),

Please take another look.

[remyoudompheng, 2011-11-28 21:27:23]

Hello golang-dev@googlegroups.com, rsc@golang.org (cc:
golang-dev@googlegroups.com, remy@archlinux.org),

Please take another look.

[remyoudompheng, 2011-12-01 22:48:13]

On 2011/11/28 21:27:23, remyoudompheng wrote:
> Hello mailto:golang-dev@googlegroups.com, mailto:rsc@golang.org (cc:
> mailto:golang-dev@googlegroups.com, mailto:remy@archlinux.org),
> 
> Please take another look.

Did you have time to take a look? 

Thanks,
Rémy.

[rsc, 2011-12-01 23:02:45]

LGTM

Thanks very much.
I think that in the ERROR prints you should use 
[+] and [.] instead of \+ and \. but I do not 
remember why.  It may have something to do
with the gccgo test suite.

[remyoudompheng, 2011-12-07 21:04:13]

Hello golang-dev@googlegroups.com, rsc@golang.org (cc:
golang-dev@googlegroups.com, remy@archlinux.org),

Please take another look.

[rsc, 2011-12-07 21:18:53]

*** Submitted as http://code.google.com/p/go/source/detail?r=e41b00eb8b9c ***

gc: keep pointer to original node in constant rewrites.

This allows printing meaningful expressions in error messages
instead of evaluated constants.
Fixes issue 2276.

R=golang-dev, rsc
CC=golang-dev, remy
http://codereview.appspot.com/5432082

Committer: Russ Cox <rsc@golang.org>