This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [RFC] Use .opt for the SPARC port
> Ah, sorry, I think I might have over-interpreted an "OK" in your
> reply to my reply ;)
OK. :-) The first OK was for the useless 3rd field in my proposition.
> So your main objection to my patch is that the string "Mask(...)"
> doesn't feature in the mask definition? If so, I suppose we could
> just allow stand-alone "Mask(FOO)" records. Would that be a reasonable
> compromise?
No. :-) I think self-contained definitions are better, like option records,
because...
> (I didn't understand your comment about the textual description.
> You used a comment in your .opt files. Couldn't you do that with
> either approach?)
... I'd prefer contextual descriptions for the masks, that is
TargetMask
Mask(M1)
;; adadadsxcvcddfdfdfd
;; dgdfdfdfdfdfdfdfere
TargetMask
Mask(M2)
;; fgfgfgfgfgfgfg
;; fgfgfgfgfgf
instead of
TargetMasks
Mask(M1) Mask(M2)
;; M1: adadadsxcvcddfdfdfd
;; dgdfdfdfdfdfdfdfere
;; M2: fgfgfgfgfgfgfg
;; fgfgfgfgfgf
At this point perhaps a third opinion would be welcome, wouldn't it?
--
Eric Botcazou