Re: [cxx-conversion] gimplify_ctx::temp_htab hash table

[Diego Novillo <dnovillo at google dot com>]

On 2012-12-01 20:44 , Lawrence Crowl wrote:

> Index: gcc/gimple-fold.c
> ===================================================================
> --- gcc/gimple-fold.c	(revision 193902)
> +++ gcc/gimple-fold.c	(working copy)
> @@ -30,6 +30,7 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3.
>   #include "tree-ssa-propagate.h"
>   #include "target.h"
>   #include "gimple-fold.h"
> +#include "gimplify-ctx.h"
>
>   /* Return true when DECL can be referenced from current unit.
>      FROM_DECL (if non-null) specify constructor of variable DECL was taken from.
> Index: gcc/tree-mudflap.c
> ===================================================================
> --- gcc/tree-mudflap.c	(revision 193902)
> +++ gcc/tree-mudflap.c	(working copy)
> @@ -43,6 +43,7 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3.
>   #include "ggc.h"
>   #include "cgraph.h"
>   #include "gimple.h"
> +#include "gimplify-ctx.h"
>
>   extern void add_bb_to_loop (basic_block, struct loop *);
>
> Index: gcc/tree-inline.c
> ===================================================================
> --- gcc/tree-inline.c	(revision 193902)
> +++ gcc/tree-inline.c	(working copy)
> @@ -48,6 +48,7 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3.
>   #include "value-prof.h"
>   #include "tree-pass.h"
>   #include "target.h"
> +#include "gimplify-ctx.h"

I don't follow.  It seems that factoring into gimplify-ctx.h does not 
actually buy much.  The files using it are just including *another* 
file.  Whereas previously, they were getting that content from gimple.h.

Unless we can stop including gimple.h from these files, I don't see a 
lot of gain in this factoring.  Am I missing something?


Diego.