This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [patch] The remainder of tree-flow.h refactored.
- From: Andrew MacLeod <amacleod at redhat dot com>
- To: Richard Biener <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
- Cc: gcc-patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Diego Novillo <dnovillo at google dot com>
- Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2013 14:15:48 -0400
- Subject: Re: [patch] The remainder of tree-flow.h refactored.
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <524EF235 dot 5080803 at redhat dot com> <CAFiYyc3wmp5N76QqTgBOeBvy=Eu6fj175+Xf0VwgxxNgfHzjHQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <5255781E dot 9030700 at redhat dot com> <4b19569b-6142-4b78-831b-2624431a606c at email dot android dot com>
On 10/09/2013 01:48 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
Andrew MacLeod <email@example.com> wrote:
On 10/08/2013 06:22 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
unvisit_body isn't generic enough to warrant moving out of gimplify.c
(the only user).
Bah, now I remember.. so there *are* other users.. this routine is
called from various front ends.. fortran, c-family and cp all call it.
That is why I wanted to move it to tree.[ch]. it doesn't belong in a
gimple file.. it operates on trees and is also used by tree front
But afaik as part of gimplifying. The gimplifier is part of the frontend-middleend interface. Lumping all of it into tree.c isn't sustainable.
Fair enough. I'll adjust... the front end files which use that
routine will just have to include gimplify.h