This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] Use TYPE_NEXT_VARIANT instead of TREE_CHAIN as chain_next for types during GC (PR c++/46400)
- From: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
- To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>, "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 15:21:07 -0700
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use TYPE_NEXT_VARIANT instead of TREE_CHAIN as chain_next for types during GC (PR c++/46400)
- References: <20110624144358.GX16443@tyan-ft48-01.lab.bos.redhat.com>
On 06/24/2011 07:43 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> + chain_next ("CODE_CONTAINS_STRUCT (TREE_CODE (&%h.generic), TS_TYPE_COMMON) ? ((union lang_tree_node *) TYPE_NEXT_VARIANT (&%h.generic)) : CODE_CONTAINS_STRUCT (TREE_CODE (&%h.generic), TS_COMMON) ? ((union lang_tree_node *) TREE_CHAIN (&%h.generic)) : NULL"))) lang_tree_node {
Is it possible to break this out into an inline (or, i suppose, out of line)
function? This is getting fairly unreadable...
r~