[PATCH INSTALLED]: delete some const shadow functions

Gabriel Dos Reis gdr@cs.tamu.edu
Sat Sep 1 22:07:00 GMT 2007

On Sat, 1 Sep 2007, Richard Guenther wrote:

| Well, it's certainly all fixable.  The case that doesn't have a nice
| workable C++ counterpart is where we do enum "inheritance" like
| for enum c_tree_code which extends enum tree_code and we
| happily pass c_tree_codes to tree_code prototyped functions for
| example.  Of course not too many functions are affected and the
| least intrusive way would be to add overloads for the c_tree_code
| variant if we build with C++.  (Or of course, add casts at the places
| where there are mismatches)  I just didn't see a nicely designed
| way to do this kind of "enum inheritance" ;)

As, this case.  I solved it with macros -- but they could be inline
functions if that is what we want.

    #define as_c_code(C)  ((enum c_tree_code) (C))
    #define as_cxx_code(C)  ((enum cp_tree_code) (C))

And you're exactly right that not many functions are actually

[There are well written C/C++ compilers out there that compile
cleanly with both C and C++ compilers.  They use similar constructs. ]

The cases that gave me some headache were the ones in the RTL stuff --
partly because I'm not an RTL expert, and partly because I had to make
sure that the other backends are not broken.

-- Gaby

More information about the Gcc-patches mailing list