This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [tree-ssa][rfc] plans for nestedfunctions
- From: Frank Heckenbach <frank at g-n-u dot de>
- To: rth at redhat dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 22:10:21 +0200
- Subject: Re: [tree-ssa][rfc] plans for nestedfunctions
- References: <20030926213651.GC21887@redhat.com>
Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Richard Henderson wrote:
> > This is stuff that was running around my head this morning.
> > I mostly wanted to write this down so that I don't forget...
> > The problem I'm trying to solve is that, at present, we have
> > ordering issues wrt compilation of nested functions.
> > (1) We depend heavily on rtl-level state in order to compile
> > nested functions.
> Why do you want to continue to support nested functions in the first
> place? They are an abomination, a gcc-specific extension, and nobody
> sane uses them (yeah, yeah, libobj, but I said _sane_).
This may be true for C, but the backend is also used for other
languages, e.g. Pascal which requires nested functions.
Frank Heckenbach, email@example.com
GnuPG and PGP keys: http://fjf.gnu.de/plan (7977168E)