This is the mail archive of the 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: RFD: HAVE_* pattern flags

On 2012-10-17 10:31, Joern Rennecke wrote:
> - What would a good naming scheme be?
>   - Change the semantics of the HAVE_pattern macros for officially named
>     patterns so that they are defined as 0 when the pattern is not provided?
>     That choice would actually force people to change #ifdef into if (),
>     without the possibility of #if, where targets can have non-constant
>     pattern predicates.

I'm preferential for this, because that's what I've tended to sprinkle across
the sources as needed when writing new code:

#ifndef HAVE_foo
# define HAVE_foo 0
# define gen_foo(x,y,z) (gcc_unreachable(), NULL_RTX)

>   - Have_pattern?
>   - have_pattern?
>   - any other preferences?

I don't see any reason to stray from HAVE_pattern.

> - how do we get the list of 'official' named patterns?
>   - We could have a header file that is maintained by hand, with a string
>     of #ifdef / #define / #endif .

This could be trivially integrated with genopinit and optabs.def,
if we cared to do so.  I'm not committed to that idea though.


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