This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [C PATCH] Print header hints (PR c/59717)
- From: Marek Polacek <polacek at redhat dot com>
- To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Richard Biener <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>, "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2014 17:09:18 +0200
- Subject: Re: [C PATCH] Print header hints (PR c/59717)
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20141007125339 dot GE3503 at redhat dot com> <CAFiYyc09m_U7gTE1SwXcSkX3U8_oyvFabs5ZxZm1GJ1MgPcXKw at mail dot gmail dot com> <20141007145131 dot GF3503 at redhat dot com> <20141007150005 dot GN1986 at tucnak dot redhat dot com>
On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 05:00:05PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 04:51:31PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 04:39:55PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > Why not annotate builtins.def with the info?
> >
> > Because I think that would be more hairy, I'd have to change DEF_BUILTIN
> > and all the builtins. That seemed superfluous given that this hint is
> > only for a C FE...
>
> Guess it depends on how many DEF_*_BUILTIN classes would this affect,
At least the following:
DEF_LIB_BUILTIN
DEF_C94_BUILTIN
DEF_C99_BUILTIN
DEF_C11_BUILTIN
DEF_C99_COMPL_BUILTIN
DEF_C99_C90RES_BUILTIN
I think that is quite a lot.
> if just a couple, you could add DEF_*_BUILTIN_WITH_C_HINT, with an extra
> arg. But as the builtins.def info already has quite long lines, making them
> even longer might not be best. So perhaps the switch is good enough.
Yeah, that the lines are long enough already was one of the things
that discouraged me from tweaking builtins.def.
Marek