This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: RFC: Java inliner
- From: Andrew Haley <aph at cambridge dot redhat dot com>
- To: Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>
- Cc: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>,Per Bothner <per at bothner dot com>, Fergus Henderson <fjh at cs dot mu dot OZ dot AU>,"gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>,"java at gcc dot gnu dot org" <java at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 19:58:57 +0100 (BST)
- Subject: Re: RFC: Java inliner
- References: <15648.40350.493795.623862@cuddles.cambridge.redhat.com><Pine.LNX.4.44.0207011455550.20102-100000@dberlin.org>
Daniel Berlin writes:
> On Mon, 1 Jul 2002, Andrew Haley wrote:
>
> > Mark Mitchell writes:
> > >
> > > The current inliner already has mechanisms for language-specific
> > > extensions. If those can be used, or it can be easily extended so that
> > > they can be used, great.
> >
> > Well I tried, I really did. But the inliner we have at the moment
> > uses C-private tree nodes to such an extent that I think it isn't
> > possible without totally messing up the code. I could replace every
> > occurrence of these nodes with macros or function pointers, but the
> > result would not be pretty. The real answer in the long term is, of
> > course, SIMPLE.
>
> Is the java inliner usable in languages other than java (IE could we
> replace the current c-inliner with your java inliner)?
No, because C needs the special C tree nodes.
> Or did you do the same thing, and create java specific nodes?
We use only the standard nodes. However, the way we interpret a
couple of these nodes, such as BLOCK, is Java specific.
Andrew.