This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] Fix checking of gimple types
- From: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
- To: David Malcolm <dmalcolm at redhat dot com>, Andrew MacLeod <amacleod at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2013 12:34:03 -0700
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix checking of gimple types
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <5271CBF9 dot 2070005 at redhat dot com> <1383236801-13234-1-git-send-email-dmalcolm at redhat dot com> <1383236801-13234-4-git-send-email-dmalcolm at redhat dot com> <5284806A dot 2050607 at redhat dot com> <1384806352 dot 11568 dot 80 dot camel at surprise> <20131121221933 dot GQ892 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <528E8837 dot 5080300 at redhat dot com> <20131121224257 dot GR892 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <528E9135 dot 7060408 at redhat dot com> <1385393718 dot 11568 dot 266 dot camel at surprise>
On 11/25/13 08:35, David Malcolm wrote:
I think the _layout names are fine for now. We might want change them
to be more descriptive at a later date.
I'm not a fan of these "_layout" names, but I'm not sure what better to
call them. Perhaps:
GSS_OMP_PARALLEL_LAYOUT -> GSS_OMP_WITH_CLAUSES_CHILD_FN_DATA_ARG
GSS_OMP_SINGLE_LAYOUT -> GSS_OMP_WITH_CLAUSES
GSS_OMP_ATOMIC_STORE_LAYOUT -> GSS_OMP_WITHOUT_SEQ_WITH_VAL
with analogous names for the corresponding structs.
OK for trunk?
It happens. I suspect you'll look beyond the sharing of data structures
to build a class hierarchy next time :-)
Sorry again for breaking this.
Thanks for quickly addressing this.