This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: the loss of SET_TYPE
- From: "Steven Bosscher" <stevenb dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- To: "Gaius Mulley" <gaius at glam dot ac dot uk>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, nathan at codesourcery dot com, zack at codesourcery dot com
- Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2006 16:31:37 +0100
- Subject: Re: the loss of SET_TYPE
- References: <87veu3e6ho.fsf@glam.ac.uk>
On 25 Mar 2006 00:02:43 +0000, Gaius Mulley <gaius@glam.ac.uk> wrote:
> Pragmatically I guess it is best for me to maintain a reversed patch
> which can be applied to a gcc-4.1.0 tar ball which reintroduces this
> TYPE. Any thoughts?
I think it would be better if you make the SET_TYPE a front-end
specific tree node, much like e.g. the tcc_type tree codes in
cp/cp-tree.def. Then you can use SET_TYPE in the front end, and
translate the set operations to valid GIMPLE later on when
gimplifying.
Gr.
Steven