Re: [PATCH 0/6] Conversion of gimple types to C++ inheritance (v3)

[Andrew MacLeod <amacleod at redhat dot com>]

On 11/05/2013 04:18 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> >    * Patch 4 of 6: This patch implement further specializations of
> >      is_a_helper <T>::test, for gimple_has_ops and gimple_has_mem_ops.
> Here's where I start to get more concerned.
>
> >    * Patch 5 of 6: This patch does the rest of porting from union access
> >      to subclass access (all the fiddly places that the script in 
> > patch 3
> >      couldn't handle).
> >
> >    * Patch 6 of 6: This patch updates the gdb python pretty-printing
> >      hook.
> Conceptually #5 and #6 shouldn't be terribly controversial.
>
> THe question is can we move forward without patch #4, even if that 
> means we aren't getting the static typechecking we want?
I doubt it.  Patch 3 is full of as_a<>  in order to convert the accessor 
functions to work with just a base gimple parameter. At this early stage 
of conversion it is pretty hard to avoid as_a<> at this lowest level in 
order to support the same interface functions we've been using.

Andrew