This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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: [PATCH]: Remove var_ann->uid


On Wed, 2005-06-29 at 15:23 -0400, DJ Delorie wrote:
> > I put the iterators in tree-flow-inline.h because they need to be static
> > inline for performance reasons, and i'm not sure about using static
> > inline's in libiberty.
> 
> So far we've been against them.  It exposes too much of libiberty's
> internals, which interferes with our ability to change them.  When we
> do decide to use them, it's usually a #define macro, not a "static
> inline" function, because we can't guarantee that everyone's configure
> will provide the right details we need to get the syntax right all the
> time.
> 
> > Okay for mainline and libiberty?
> 
> Libiberty bits are OK, with these caveats...
> 
> >  typedef void *(*htab_alloc_with_arg) (void *, size_t, size_t);
> >  typedef void (*htab_free_with_arg) (void *, void *);
> > +/* This macro defines reserved value for empty table entry. */
> > +
> 
> Should have a blank line before that comment.  Also, two spaces after
> the period.

Okay.

> 
> > @@ -190,6 +198,9 @@ extern hashval_t iterative_hash (const v
> >  /* Shorthand for hashing something with an intrinsic size.  */
> >  #define iterative_hash_object(OB,INIT) iterative_hash (&OB, sizeof (OB), INIT)
> >  
> > +
> > +
> > +
> >  #ifdef __cplusplus
> >  }
> 
> What are these new blank likes for for?

Oh, that's where the new macro was, apparently it didn't cut all the
whitespace when i moved it to tree-flow-inline.h



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