This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [RFC] Fight dependencies in C front end on middle-end include files
- From: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Steven Bosscher <stevenb dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- Cc: GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Diego Novillo <dnovillo at google dot com>
- Date: Sat, 15 May 2010 17:00:13 +0000 (UTC)
- Subject: Re: [RFC] Fight dependencies in C front end on middle-end include files
- References: <AANLkTimS3QWT7fx9zhbc6ryvUR6luy01tdCB6LzaCYVq@mail.gmail.com>
On Sat, 15 May 2010, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> OK after fixing the Makefile stuff, which I of course completely
> forgot about until a minute ago, while writing this e-mail? :-)
The C front-end changes (changes to c-*) are OK.
> Index: gcc/c-cppbuiltin.c
> ===================================================================
> --- gcc/c-cppbuiltin.c (revision 159418)
> +++ gcc/c-cppbuiltin.c (working copy)
> +#include "tm_p.h" /* For TARGET_CPU_CPP_BUILTINS & friends. */
TARGET_CPU_CPP_BUILTINS should probably be C-family hooks (hooks in
targetcm rather than targetm, underlying functions defined in
target-specific C-family-specific source files) - or, eventually,
languages-using-preprocessor hooks (the Fortran front end has
commented-out code to use them).
> Index: gcc/c-pragma.c
> ===================================================================
> --- gcc/c-pragma.c (revision 159418)
> +++ gcc/c-pragma.c (working copy)
> +#include "tm_p.h" /* For REGISTER_TARGET_PRAGMAS (why is
> + this not a target hook?). */
Again, should probably be a C-family hook. targetcm is a lot more recent
(2007) than the original target structure (2001).
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com