This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Reformatting and minor code changes for dwarf2out.c
- From: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
- To: kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu (Richard Kenner)
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 20:28:44 +0000
- Subject: Re: Reformatting and minor code changes for dwarf2out.c
- References: <10112270115.AA24478@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu>
>>>>> "Richard" == Richard Kenner <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Speaking as the dwarf2out maintainer, I agree with Richard.
> Umm... we're both "Richard".
Er, so you are. I suppose I'm used to thinking of you as "Kenner". :)
> I very seldom think that abstraction makes the code harder to read.
> It doesn't if it's carried through. Here we had exactly *one*
> abstract operation, used exactly once. That was more "abstraction for
> the sake of abstraction". Moreover, that one usage is *explicitly*
> deadling with incomplete types, unlike when the purpose of the code is
> to do something else and you want to abstract away some sub-operation.
I don't think an abstraction is necessarily invalid because it's only used
once. It is conceivable that we might want to change how these types are
recorded at some point--indeed, I'm pretty sure it used to use a linked
list--and with it in a separate function, the main logic doesn't need to
change. Abstract data types and all that. But this is a general point; I
don't really care much about this instance.
> The same goes for save_rtl, which you removed in a previous patch.
> That one I realized afterwards would probably have been better to just
> change to take the rtx as a parameter and return void. With GC, it
> didn't make an sense any more as a function returning rtl since a
> caller tends to want to know sometimes whether an rtl has been
> modified or not. This one is a case where indeed the abstraction of a
> sub-operation makes more sense. But I don't think it's worth putting
> back at this point unless you do.
I suppose it isn't important. But don't remove any other abstractions,