This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: PowerPC SVR4 ABI compliance fix



On Monday, November 26, 2001, at 11:32 AM, Stan Shebs wrote:

> Geoff Keating wrote:
>>
>> In the long run, we probably don't want to have a single word that is
>> a bitmask of all the target options.  It might be good to just add to
>> the frontend the ability to set a single 'int' variable for each
>> option, just as it does now for (for instance) the -fxxx options.
>
> I agree with this.  The habit of using bit masks in a single global
> "to save space" was still commonplace in the 80s, but today it's just
> an archaism.

We might want to keep them as fields in a struct, rather than separate
variables, to make the relationship obvious.  Bit-fields would work,
but chars are more efficient and there's no real need to microoptimize
this amount of space.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]