This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: new __builtin_choose_type (patch)
- To: Dale Johannesen <dalej at apple dot com>
- Subject: Re: new __builtin_choose_type (patch)
- From: Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at redhat dot com>
- Date: 02 Oct 2001 17:39:27 -0400
- Cc: dewar at gnat dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- References: <200110021929.MAA13101@scv3.apple.com>
On Tue, 2001-10-02 at 15:29, Dale Johannesen wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 2, 2001, at 12:02 PM, email@example.com wrote:
> > This seems a bit of a kludgy feature to me. Do we really need to add
> > overloading to C for this purpose? If so, surely it should be done
> > in a manner that is coherent with the rest of the language.
> Well, the Altivec extensions require overloading, but this doesn't
> necessarily have to be visible to everybody else. Motorola's approach
> (also used by Apple, at least for now) was to define a hook for
> target-dependent builtins, so the overloading stuff could be hidden
are these hooks in the middle/front end? last i heard apple/motorola
were doing all sorts of crazy stuff modifying a myraid of files NOT in
config/rs6000/. if so, i like that approach even less.
Aldy Hernandez E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Professional Gypsy on a Motorcycle
Red Hat, Inc.