This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Normalizing the bitmap APIs.
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 11:57 PM, Diego Novillo <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On 2012-10-11 16:25 , Lawrence Crowl wrote:
>> On 10/11/12, Diego Novillo <email@example.com> wrote:
>>> On 2012-10-11 13:26 , Lawrence Crowl wrote:
>>>> My only other concern was that the mapping between those function
>>>> names and the tasks to be done sometimes seemed less than obvious.
>>>> So, I proposed the name change. However, I think the current names
>>>> are workable, assuming an acceptable solution to the above problem.
>>> I would say, add both variants and make the empty ones drop the return
>>> value. So, for instance, bitmap_ior returns a value, so make
>>> bitmap_ior_cg drop it.
>> That convention is opposite from what is used in sbitmap, where _cg
>> indicates that it returns the bool. I think returning the value
>> will be the less common case.
> Sorry, I mixed the two up. I meant the version that makes sense.
What's the issue with always returning the changed status? bitmap operations
(even more so sbitmap operations) are memory-bound, accumulating one more
register isn't speed critial.