This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Target FUNCTION_{PRO,EPI}LOGUE question
- To: neil at daikokuya dot demon dot co dot uk (Neil Booth)
- Subject: Re: Target FUNCTION_{PRO,EPI}LOGUE question
- From: Joern Rennecke <amylaar at redhat dot com>
- Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 23:25:51 +0100 (BST)
- Cc: amylaar at redhat dot com (Joern Rennecke),jsturm at one-point dot com (Jeff Sturm),fjh at cs dot mu dot oz dot au (Fergus Henderson),jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk (Joseph S. Myers), gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
> You could create a /tree directory, perhaps, with one file per tree
> type, and define all the member functions in there. Everything can be
> static, and with short names. See current target work for an example
> on how this can be done easily and cleanly. I fail to see how it can
> be considered worse than the current way.
So instead of writing a handful of functions for your new optimization pass,
you write several thousand little functions, with lots of repetition,
scattered over 100 files.
I fail to see how writing the compiler in assember can be worse.