This is the mail archive of the gcc@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: Compiling GCC with g++: a report


On Tue, 2005-05-24 at 10:49 +0200, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> | So you don't see any value whatsoever to having (for instance) the
> | individual constants of 'enum machine_mode' be inaccessible in most of
> | GCC?  'cos I sure do.
>
> What I'm saying is that when you have a name like EXPAND_NORMAL, you
> do not need to know the value it represents.  Just that it names a
> constant.

We appear to be still talking about two different cases.  I am talking
about the case where, in C++, you might declare something like

class machine_mode
{
  enum {
    VOIDmode, SImode, // ...
  } value;

 // accessors, whatever ...
};

and then pass around 'machine_mode' objects.  Does this help?

zw



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