This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: C++: Why do we nreverse CLASSTYPE_TAGS

On 25 Mar 2003 06:38:33 +0100, Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net> wrote:

> Yes.  However, a linear search is done when looking for nested-types
> in decl.c:lookup_tag().  Replacing current_binding_level->tags with a 
> hash-table turned out to affect CLASSTYPE_TAGS also since we do some
> random assignments here and there...

Do we still need to use current_binding_level->tags to find types?
Shouldn't that information be in the BINDING structures now?  We really
ought to unify the name lookup code.

Jason
Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]