This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: TREE_LIST, a new hope -- from oldlto branch
- From: Michael Matz <matz at suse dot de>
- To: Steven Bosscher <stevenb dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- Cc: GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, kazu at codesourcery dot com, "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Tue, 4 May 2010 14:13:28 +0200 (CEST)
- Subject: Re: TREE_LIST, a new hope -- from oldlto branch
- References: <p2r571f6b511005031250h57518303qb650e36f28f15f06@mail.gmail.com>
Hello,
On Mon, 3 May 2010, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> * gcc/stor-layout.c (pending_sizes): Change the type to
> VEC(tree,gc) *.
If we're doing such cleanups (and I think they're nice), can we at the
same time introduce nicer syntax for commonly used vectors? I really hate
reading these "VEC(bla)" things, they are so non-C. For instance the
"VEC(tree,gc)*" type could be named "treegv" (and the heap variant
treehv). The accessor functions could then be treegv_iterate, and
treegv_safe_push and so on.
Ciao,
Michael.