This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH INSTALLED]: const typedefs part 19/N
On 8/27/07, Kaveh R. GHAZI <ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu> wrote:
> Was there some offline conspiracy I wasn't invited to? :-)
Ha! Nothing of the sort :) Just idle chatter on the IRC channel.
> You "strongly object"? I didn't realize it was such a big deal, but ok.
Yes. I'm sorry I didn't realize sooner. I have to admit that I was
not paying too much attention to these patches because I had only seen
briefly that it involved changing 'tree' to 'const_tree' which seemed
to me a bit on the ugly side but didn't mind too much.
I stopped paying attention to the discussion and patches until I saw
this morning that it wasn't just the tree->const_tree change. There
were new shadow functions, which is when I realized the scope of the
changes.
> I'll stop adding shadow functions and iterators. I had more in the
> pipeline, so I'm glad you guys spoke up and made your feelings about it
> clear. I'm a bit worried about reverting existing stuff because of
> dependencies though. Let me see what's involved.
Well, if it means that we have to stop using 'const_tree' in function
arguments, then I would much rather have that than this alternative.
Duplicating code in this manner is just not workable.
Thanks.