This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org 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: no_new_pseudos


On Mon, Jul 09, 2007 at 02:54:49PM -0400, Richard Kenner wrote:
> > Am I the only one who completely fails to see the point of the
> > spelling change?  I realize that you have said you find negative
> > predicates confusing - I don't, but I do find changing predicates
> > confusing.  I applaud cleaning up the definition and/or replacing it
> > with a macro, and I'd applaud adding some extra internals
> > documentation about it, but I think the fact that it's been called
> > no_new_pseudos for so long suggests that we should just leave it
> > called that if we want a predicate that means the same thing.
> 
> The reason to change it is that no_new_pseudos has been misused in the
> past to both refer to what it's supposed to mean and to talk about
> specific points in the compilation.  If we pick a new name (I don't think
> anybody cares about the negative or positive distinction) we avoid
> perpetuating that history.

Now that Ian's accepted the only point in real dispute (that the name
should refer to the concept that pseudos can or cannot be produced,
not to the phase that the compiler is in), how about letting him pick
the name, check in the patch, and kill this thread?


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