Re: [lto] PATCH: add more CALL_EXPR interfaces

[Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>]

Sandra Loosemore wrote:
> Mark Mitchell wrote:
> 
>> I suggest tcc_vl_exp as a better name for the new class (rather than
>> tcc_call) in that your new representation will work for any
>> variable-length expression node.  (The macros that are based on the
>> class name would want to change as well, of course.)  The patch is OK
>> with that change.
> 
> Hmmm, OK.  I did wonder if I should try to generalize this beyond the
> needs of CALL_EXPR-like things, but I thought that might be seen as
> "mission creep" since I don't really know what else might fall into this
> category.  Of course, it's easy to rename things at this point.

Let's be optimistic, and assume that there are other nodes that can
benefit from eliminating separate lists, in the same was as CALL_EXPRs.
 Even if there aren't any such now, there might be such things in
future.  So, I'd prefer to have the name be more generic.

Thanks,

-- 
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery
mark@codesourcery.com
(650) 331-3385 x713