This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [patch 3/4] Separate gimple.[ch] and gimplify.[ch] - front end files

On 11/14/2013 05:06 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 8:34 AM, Andrew MacLeod <> wrote:
On 11/14/2013 11:23 AM, Michael Matz wrote:

On Thu, 14 Nov 2013, Andrew MacLeod wrote:

I think if following through with the whole plan there would (and
should) be nothing remaining that could be called a gimple expression.
very possibly, i just haven't gotten to those parts yet. I can change
the name back to gimple-decl.[ch] or some such thing if you like that
-object? -operand? -stuff? ;-)  Will all of these splits land at trunk,
i.e. 4.9?  Why the hurry when not even such high-level things are clear?
I mean how can you think about rearchitecting the gimple data structures
without having looked at the current details.  It's clear that not every
detail of the design can be fixated at this point, but basic questions
like "what's the operands?", "will there be expressions?", "how do we
iterate?", "recursive structures or not?" should at least get some answer
before really starting grind work, shouldn't they?

The splits are for header file cleanup and re-structuring into logical
components.  As I mentioned in the original post,  the file is needed to
break dependency cycles between gimple.h (the statements) , the iterators,
and gimplification.  It is for the gimple stuff which doesn't need any of
those things but is consumed by them.

This really has nothing to do with my future plans, other than the fact that
I also said whatever is in this file is will eventually be split into more
things, but I'm not ready to do those splits yet, thus the gimple-blah name
doesn't matter to me.  gimple-expr seemed convenient at the time but clearly
you don't like it, and I'll happily call it whatever you want.  It's a grab
bag of all the gimple values which are still trees...

maybe the suggested  gimple-val.[ch] is ok?

It breaks Ada build.  I checked in the following patch to unbreak


I was bootstrapping Ada as well until the end of last week. It seems to be broken right now, so I had turned Ada off until the issue is resolved.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]