[m-rev.] for review: more work on intermodule analysis

[Peter Wang]

On 2006-02-03, Julien Fischer <juliensf at cs.mu.OZ.AU> wrote:
> > +        %
> > +        % XXX: Currently modules which are basically empty do not get
> > +        % `.analysis' files produced.  After that is fixed we can probably
> > +        % consider modules with missing `.analysis' files to be invalid.
> >          %
> 
> We probably want something equivalent to `--use-trans-opt'.
> 
> My main concern with these missing analysis files is that there doesn't
> seem to be a way to for the compiler to distinguish between analysis
> files that are missing because there were no analysis results and those
> that are missing because something went wrong.
> 

Well, you *could* check if a `.analysis_date' file exists, but I'm not
yet deleting stale `.analysis_date' files when something goes wrong.

I've committed the changes.  Thanks for looking.

Peter
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
mercury-reviews mailing list
post:  mercury-reviews at cs.mu.oz.au
administrative address: owner-mercury-reviews at cs.mu.oz.au
unsubscribe: Address: mercury-reviews-request at cs.mu.oz.au Message: unsubscribe
subscribe:   Address: mercury-reviews-request at cs.mu.oz.au Message: subscribe
--------------------------------------------------------------------------