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: Flags parameter in comptypes

From: Jim Wilson <wilson at specifixinc dot com>
To: "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm at polyomino dot org dot uk>
Cc: geoffk at apple dot com, zack at codesourcery dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 19:27:02 -0700
Subject: Re: Flags parameter in comptypes
References: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0406062218050.4999@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>

Joseph S. Myers wrote:

Thus the only point I can see in the parameter is that it makes the
interface compatible with the C++ front end - but this isn't being used
anywhere (no common code calls comptypes).  Do we really want to keep an
unused parameter passed among four functions on the basis that it might be
useful for interface compatibility in future?

I'd say no.

Would it make sense to file a feature-request PR asking that
-Wunused-parameter detect such situations?

That would require intraprocedural analysis and would be hard to do on RTL, which is where the current checks are done. I don't think it would be feasible to add this without completely rewriting the code to operate on trees or gimple. I don't think this would be a very useful PR. That is just my opinion though. -- Jim Wilson, GNU Tools Support, http://www.SpecifixInc.com

References:
- Flags parameter in comptypes
  - From: Joseph S. Myers

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