Tue Sep 16 21:23:00 GMT 2014
On 09/16/2014 05:12 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Sep 2014, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
>> I did an include file reduction on all the language/*.[ch] and core *.[ch]
>> files, but left the target files with the full complement of 7 includes that
>> function.h use to have. Its probably easier when this is all done to fully
>> reduce the targets one at a time... there are so many nooks and crannies I
>> figured I'd bust something right now if i tried to do all the targets as well
> How did you determine what includes to remove? You appear to have removed
> tm.h includes from various files that do in fact use target macros; maybe
> they get it indirectly included by some other header, but I thought a
> principle of this flattening was to avoid relying on such indirect
> inclusions. Because of possible use of target macros in #ifdef
> conditionals, "compiles with the include removed" is not a sufficient
> condition for removing it.
Many of those files do in fact get numerous include files from expr.h,
which are likely to get put back in when expr.h is flattened, but there
is a risk as you point out.
Perhaps I should proceed by simply moving the includes and removing any
duplicate includes, leaving the reduction for later date. There is less
chance of that causing issues. I did forget about the discussion last
year concerning target macros from the RTL end of things... My mind is
slowly going :-).
More information about the Gcc-patches