This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH 0/6] Convert gimple to a C++ class hierarchy
- From: Mike Stump <mikestump at comcast dot net>
- To: Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz>
- Cc: David Malcolm <dmalcolm at redhat dot com>, Martin Jambor <mjambor at suse dot cz>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2013 07:48:59 -0700
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] Convert gimple to a C++ class hierarchy
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1377793216-22549-1-git-send-email-dmalcolm at redhat dot com> <alpine dot LNX dot 2 dot 00 dot 1308301532490 dot 9949 at wotan dot suse dot de> <1377890482 dot 29222 dot 32 dot camel at surprise> <20130902123533 dot GA23002 at virgil dot suse> <1378257610 dot 18117 dot 48 dot camel at surprise> <20130904140911 dot GA16341 at kam dot mff dot cuni dot cz>
On Sep 4, 2013, at 7:09 AM, Jan Hubicka <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Making gengtype to generate ggc_mark for each type would make hand writting
> easier - you can use C++ overloading instead of trying to guess the funny
> names gengtype uses right now.
> But that is independent of this change. I am slowly getting used to the
> world of hand written gengtype markings.
I'd rather plugin generated code that applies general rules to the transitive closure of all types needed. The markings would be for exceptions to those rules, which should be very, very rare. The load for someone writing and maintaining code is then reduced and the fear of GTY doesn't play a role in activities such as refactoring, as there would be nothing to do. I know it, and I have a healthy fear of it. :-)