This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Building GENERIC trees
- From: law at redhat dot com
- To: Tom Crick <cs1tc at bath dot ac dot uk>
- Cc: "" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2004 11:11:08 -0700
- Subject: Re: Building GENERIC trees
- Reply-to: law at redhat dot com
In message <1078431212.40478dec6ddeb@webmail.bath.ac.uk>, Tom Crick writes:
>I'm leaning towards going straight to GENERIC trees, just for the simple fact
>that it prevents having to write a 'genericise()' function and the need to
>create my own AST - I'd have a documented format to aim towards.
Creating generic directly would be my recommendation.
> How complex is it to build GENERIC trees, as I am mindful of having
> contingency plans if it goes awry.
Fairly simple if you start with GENERIC as your target. It's harder to
retrofit if you've already got a large body of code which generates its
own AST.
The f95 front-end generates GENERIC trees directly and may be useful for
you to use as a reference.
jeff