Re: Tree inlining for the C front end (part 1 of 3)

[Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>]

On Oct  3, 2001, Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com> wrote:

>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2001-09/msg01019.html
> +#define LANG_CANNOT_INLINE_TREE_FN(FNP) \
> +  (lang_cannot_inline_tree_fn ? (*lang_cannot_inline_tree_fn)(FNP) : 0)
> +typedef int treeopt_cannot_inline_tree_fn_type PARAMS ((tree*));
> +extern treeopt_cannot_inline_tree_fn_type *lang_cannot_inline_tree_fn;

> I do not like these.  If you need hooks, add them to the
> lang_hooks struct in toplev.c.

I considered doing this, but it would require anything that uses the
hooks to have to include tree-inline.h.  Besides, I don't like
lang_hooks much because the initializers are ordered, not named, which
may lead to synchronization difficulties and warnings about missing
initializers, especially for languages maintained outside the GCC CVS
tree.

Are these caveats acceptable, in which case I'll go ahead and use
lang_hooks anyway?

-- 
Alexandre Oliva   Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer                  aoliva@{cygnus.com, redhat.com}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp        oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist    *Please* write to mailing lists, not to me