Re: [incremental] Patch: FYI: more late gimplification clean up

["Richard Guenther" <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>]

On Dec 4, 2007 9:43 PM, Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com> wrote:
> I'm checking this in on the incremental-compiler branch.
>
> This is a follow-on to my last patch.  This one cleans up a couple
> places where we were running passes in the front end which required
> gimple input.
>
> The first is diagnose_omp_structured_block_errors.  I just turned this
> into an ordinary pass, which is run near the start of
> all_lowering_passes.  I don't really understand why this couldn't be
> done this way on the trunk.  But, since a lot of the test suite is not
> working on my branch, perhaps the answer is waiting to be found.
>
> The second is c_gimple_diagnostics_recursively.  Here I took a
> potentially controversial route: I added a new langhook for a
> post-gimplification pass.
>
> I don't know if this is the best choice.  Please comment.
> Note that this won't affect LTO, which AIUI is the primary driver
> behind the "no new langhooks" direction.
>
> The other possible choice here was to make this into a generic pass,
> in its own file.  The approach I took has less code churn.  The "new
> file" approach should work just as well; AFAICT the code here is
> actually language-independent.

IMHO a separate pass is preferably here.

Btw - thanks for doing this work,
Richard.