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: RFC - Alternatives to gengtype

From: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com>
To: Basile Starynkevitch <basile at starynkevitch dot net>
Cc: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at google dot com>, Uday Khedker <uday at cse dot iitb dot ac dot in>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2012 18:32:51 +0000
Subject: Re: RFC - Alternatives to gengtype
References: <CAAkRFZJzksJVZm7yjkSGai6C57J3Q9EdkfkMz9T6kp1kAS+oDw@mail.gmail.com> <20121117083536.GA23336@ours.starynkevitch.net> <20121117120333.474B733C87@vlsi1.gnat.com> <20121117150409.GA23794@ours.starynkevitch.net> <50A7B078.8010105@cse.iitb.ac.in> <CAD_=9DSeBAqBN6VwJFgr70e13g9iqV+sJ+G=LJVp7CLxpC1rFA@mail.gmail.com> <20121118180354.GA27697@ours.starynkevitch.net>

On 18 November 2012 18:03, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
> Regarding PCH [pre-compiled header], I think that it is related to PPH
> [pre-processed headers]
>
> I don't understand yet if PPH is abandoned, or just post-poned. I was
> believing it was a very mature experimental branch.

See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2012-11/msg00253.html

References:
- Re: RFC - Alternatives to gengtype
  - From: Xinliang David Li
- Re: RFC - Alternatives to gengtype
  - From: Basile Starynkevitch
- Re: RFC - Alternatives to gengtype
  - From: Richard Kenner
- Re: RFC - Alternatives to gengtype
  - From: Basile Starynkevitch
- Re: RFC - Alternatives to gengtype
  - From: Uday Khedker
- Re: RFC - Alternatives to gengtype
  - From: Diego Novillo
- Re: RFC - Alternatives to gengtype
  - From: Basile Starynkevitch

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