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: [PATCH] Fix PR c/9262


> Eh.  I think I'd rather you did the split the other way around:
> create a flag_inlining_on_rtl which is frobbed by the front ends that
> want tree inlining, and leave flag_inline_functions named what it is
> right now.

The rationale was to keep the changes local to a single file, so as to
minimize the impact on the whole compiler. I thought this rationale was in
accordance with the current situation, because flag_inline_functions should
already have been renamed. Call that over-interpretation... or laziness :-)

> Also, does this effect mean that the front ends that use tree inlining
> ignore -finline-functions?

No, flag_inline_functions is correctly set by -finline-functions and taken
into account by the front-ends that use tree inlining. The problem is that
they unset it (rightfully of course) before the ouput of the assembly file
(in c-opts.c for example).

- Eric


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