This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: shouldn't every middle-end pass be uniquely named?
Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
Andrew Thomas Pinski wrote:
Except as a habit (which I think is a bad one) is there any reason to
have anonymous passes (those with a null pass->name), or (I don't
know if such beast exists) homonym passes (two different passes with
equal pass->name)?
Yes. To prevent a dump file. One such example is freeing the internal
data structures. That should not have a dump.
We might add a field (e.g. unsigned avoid_dump) to struct opt_pass for
that, or decide that passes name starting with a star (or whatever
convention people want) do not have any dump file.
I actually proposed a patch on gcc-patches@ which do not dump when the
pass name starts with a dot (better than a star, because following unix
conventions for "hidden" files)
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-07/msg02406.html
regards.
--
Basile STARYNKEVITCH http://starynkevitch.net/Basile/
email: basile<at>starynkevitch<dot>net mobile: +33 6 8501 2359
8, rue de la Faiencerie, 92340 Bourg La Reine, France
*** opinions {are only mines, sont seulement les miennes} ***