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: [PATCH] Canonical types (1/3)

> On Nov 28, 2006, at 10:14 AM, Richard Kenner wrote:
> >> It seems to me that all the frontends should use these fields.
> >> Hopefully we can use it as a lever to eliminate the  
> >> types_compatible_p
> >> langhook.
> >
> > They can certainly "use" them but are there any front ends besides
> > C and C++ where they'd *gain* anything from there: where two types are
> > to be considered identical even though they are different tree nodes.
> Java and Ada I suspect as the only ones that might, depends upon the  
> nature of the code and depends on wether those front ends build  
> duplicates or go out of their way to not do this.  If they don't build  
> duplicates or if they just don't exercise comptypes much, there'd be  
> no benefit.

Actually with Ada (and Fortran), they get no benifit as both don't create
a tree level until parsing and semantic analysis is done.  If someone was
going to rewrite the C++ front-end, this is the first thing they should do
and get away from building trees for things like templates which are not used.

Andrew Pinski

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