Re: Factor unrelated declarations out of tree.h (2/2)

["Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>]

On Thu, 14 Nov 2013, Diego Novillo wrote:

> This patch contains the mechanical side-effects from
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-11/msg01663.html

There are rather a lot of "Include tm.h" changes here - especially in 
front ends, where we've tried to eliminate tm.h calls, and put comments on 
some of those remaining saying exactly what target macros are used to make 
clear what's needed to eliminate them.  Putting in these includes, without 
clear comments explaining how to eliminate them, seems a step backwards.

As far as I can see, your previous patch did not add any declarations to 
tm.h itself, so I guess this is because files are now including some other 
header that has a tm.h requirement.  This indicates that this other header 
needs to be split up, with the parts needing tm.h separate from those that 
don't (well - a more logical split would be better than one based on 
"needing tm.h"), to avoid regressing so much in the elimination of tm.h 
from front ends.

(FWIW, I consider tm.h one of the worst headers in modularity terms, and 
one of the most important to eliminate includes of.)

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com