This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org 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: C++ PATCH: use identifier_p instead of naked TREE_CODE == IDENTIFIER_NODE


Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@integrable-solutions.net> writes:
> In many places, we do thinks like:
>   1. test that we have a identifier.
>   2. immediately follow that with access to parts of the
>       tree as identifiers, but check again that we really
>       an identifier, etc.
>
> There is nothing silly about that.

Sure, it's a common and useful pattern.  I'm just saying it's silly to
call it "..._p" in that case...

-miles

-- 
éäããããæãããéãæããã


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