This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [c++, cxx-reflection] Initial thoughts on type reflection.
Phil Edwards <phil at jaj dot com> writes:
| On Mon, Mar 10, 2003 at 07:07:35AM +0100, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
| > Phil Edwards <phil at jaj dot com> writes:
| >
| > | > want them to me marked BUILT_IN_FRONT_END. Our built-ins will be
| > | > expanded by the front-end (into a tree or GIMPLE or whatever it gets
| > | > called by the time we merge).
| [...]
| > | So, going that route sort of obviates any BUILT_IN_* stuff as far as
| > | I can tell; the "operators" are handled specially.
| >
| > Whether you call it "operator" or built-in that takes a type-id does
| > not change anything fundamental at all.
|
| I think we're talking past each other. My point here is:
|
| - If it's a builtin operator (or whatever) that takes a type, then we
| cannot use builtins.def and the BUILT_IN_* enums directly. At all.
| Or at least not without major reworking.
No *major* reworking. Just reworking. Before we add our own mess, I
think we ought to clarify the built-in machinery as currently is.
-- Gaby