This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [patch] Flatten function.h take 2
- From: Andrew MacLeod <amacleod at redhat dot com>
- To: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
- Cc: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, gcc-patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Richard Biener <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
- Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2014 21:28:03 -0400
- Subject: Re: [patch] Flatten function.h take 2
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <54188D7E dot 4090701 at redhat dot com> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1409162107490 dot 4182 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <5418AA5D dot 2090602 at redhat dot com> <542995A6 dot 5040200 at redhat dot com> <543846EE dot 3070907 at redhat dot com>
On 10/10/2014 04:51 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
Yeah.. the nature of these flattening patches.. they tend to look very
large, but in reality only the first few files tend to have any changes
that aren't mechanical.
On 09/29/14 11:23, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
This version is fine assuming your testing went OK. It's a highly
mechanical patch once you get to the .c files. SO it wasn't nearly as
bad as I expected when I saw its size :-)
OK, here's take 2.. I left all the include files except ones which were
duplicated as a result of the flattening. The first one was left, and
any subsequent #Includes of the files were removed. we'll address
"unneeded" includes separately and all at once.. perhaps with a newer
tool that has been taught about input and output dependencies
Bootstrapepd on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu with no new regressions.
Currently config-list.mk is building, but Im not expecting any issues
there. assuming all is oK, ok to check in?
PS.. the original commentary:
This flattens function.h. It wasn't too bad, there were a few
prototypes and defines in expr.h and rtl.h that belong in function.h,
and a couple of other prototypes that belonged in other .h files. A
bunch of the gen*.c generated files actually use function.h.. so they
needed some tweaking.
i use to list them in separate patches, now I just list them first and
try to describe the bits that are not obvious :)
PS. Testing went fine :-)