This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: 3.0.1 Freeze
- To: Bo Thorsen <bo at sonofthor dot dk>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Subject: Re: 3.0.1 Freeze
- From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2001 09:20:22 -0700
> Why is it that most of you insist on macros instead of const ints? Afaik
> gcc will generate the exact same code for:
I don't "insist", which is something of a loaded term.
I see that there are already >10 messages on this thread. If all of
those people worked for me, and were standing around a water cooler having
this conversation in my office, I'd come along and send everyone
back to work. It matters a lot less whether we use macros or const ints
here than it does that we solve the problem.
Now, that said, I'm happy to use const ints instead. I'm happy to have
a patch that removes many of the macros in GCC; in fact, I've already
written such patches and approved other such patches. I've encouraged
Neil in his crusade to functionify much of the target machine headers.
The bottom line is this: I made an executive decision in order to get the
job done. David seemed vaguely willing to be volunteered into working on
the configurations, and Gaby will work on the generic limits. We will
get a release done that works better. If, after the release, we want
to replace the macros, that's OK. If Gaby and David want to agree
amongst themselves to do it now, and it won't slow them down, that's OK
too. What is not OK is to debate the issue, *rather* than solving
Mark Mitchell email@example.com
CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com