[m-dev.] for review: a big step towards the trace-based debugger (part 1 of 3)

[Fergus Henderson]

On 20-Mar-1998, Zoltan Somogyi <zs at cs.mu.OZ.AU> wrote:
> 
> compiler/continuation_info.m:
> compiler/stack_layout.m:
> 	Do not associate the stack layout information at procedure entry and
> 	exit with the per-procedure data structure. Since we now associate this
> 	info with the labels of those events instead, they do not need special
> 	handling. However, do include a pointer to the call event's label's
> 	layout structure in the per-procedure data, so that we can later
> 	implement redo in the debugger.

When you say the "call event's label", do you mean the entry label?
If so, please say so.

>  :- type proc_layout_info
>  	--->	proc_layout_info(
>  			proc_label,	% the proc label
>  			determinism,	% which stack is used
>  			int,		% number of stack slots
> +			maybe(int),	% location of succip on stack
> +			maybe(label),	% name of the label of the call event
> +			proc_label_layout_info
> +					% info for each internal label,
> +					% needed for basic_stack_layouts
>  		).

Ditto here: I don't know what "the label of the call event" means.

> +		% Add empty entries for the labels that do not have real info,
> +		% since if continuation_info__process_instructions is invoked
> +		% then MR_USE_STACK_LAYOUTS will be defined, and this demands
> +		% a stack layout data structure for every label, even if it
> +		% is not used. When this aspect of the runtime is fixed,
> +		% we will be able to remove this step.

It would be helpful to include a more specific pointer to which part
of the runtime it is that needs to be fixed.

Otherwise part 1 of 3 looks OK.

-- 
Fergus Henderson <fjh at cs.mu.oz.au>  |  "I have always known that the pursuit
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh>  |  of excellence is a lethal habit"
PGP: finger fjh at 128.250.37.3        |     -- the last words of T. S. Garp.