This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: IPA merge part 1: localize SSA variables
On Wed, 2006-11-15 at 22:11 +0100, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > Jan Hubicka wrote on 11/15/06 15:59:
> > >>Jan Hubicka wrote on 11/15/06 15:49:
> > >alternatively with the gimple_ prefixes or some other variant.
> > >
> > Well, I'm biased. I kind-of like blah/set_blah, but I think I'm in the
> > minority, so I won't push for it.
>
> I would vote for blah/set_blah too (for consistency and better
> extendability), so unless someone speaks out soon, I would go for it.
> >
I have always preferred blah/set_blah. It give you the ability to exert
better interface control, allowing easier changes under the covers down
the road. It can also make finding bad sets easier when debugging :-).
> > Regarding the accessor name, might as well prefix them with gimple_
>
> This will imply more reformating for me, but it is definitly better to
> do it at once if there is overall plan for the prefixing. Shorter
> prefix would be nice ;)
I think gimple_ is fine. The only other alternative I can think of
would be the first letter, but g_df and r_df look too cryptic to me.
tree_ doesn't work since that would become tuples_ soon :-)
Andrew