This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] Add documentation about gengtype and inheritance
- From: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
- To: David Malcolm <dmalcolm at redhat dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2013 12:49:41 -0600
- Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] Add documentation about gengtype and inheritance
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1379685919-9437-1-git-send-email-dmalcolm at redhat dot com> <1380044971-11810-1-git-send-email-dmalcolm at redhat dot com> <1380044971-11810-5-git-send-email-dmalcolm at redhat dot com>
On 09/24/13 11:49, David Malcolm wrote:
So what happens if I have a class hierarchy without a gty-user marker
which violates the assumptions made by your new code?
* doc/gty.texi (GTY Options): Add note about inheritance to
description of desc and tag.
(Inheritance and GTY): New.
I'm not worried about existing code with gty-user markers as I can
easily see how those are avoided. I'm thinking more of new code where
the author isn't as familiar with the gty machinery as they should be or
in the future if we're using this stuf extensively and someone mucks
around with the class hierarchy and breaks one of the assumptions. I
just want to make sure those two cases fail-safe.
As for this patch, it is OK once the prerequisites go in.