Anonymous Namespaces

[Kevin Atkinson]

On Sun, 1 Feb 2004, Jan Hubicka wrote:

> > On 1 Feb 2004, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> > 
> > > Jan Hubicka <hubicka@ucw.cz> writes:
> > > 
> > > | I am having related problem with unit-at-a-time.  With -fwhole program I
> > > | need to make functions that are public in C/C++ static for the backend.
> > > | I am having prototype patch, but still I am holding because I am unsure
> > > | whether clearing up TREE_PUBLIC in cgraph_optimize is TRT.
> > > | Given that we want to declare TREE_PUBLIC to be in backend's semantic
> > > | and make frontends to use different flag when these don't match (that is
> > > | with -fwhole-program almost always),  I think I can update the patch and
> > > | propose it for mainline once I am done with merging the tree-SSA cgraph
> > > | code back.
> > > 
> > > I'll hold on your patch then.
> > 
> > So can someone give me an idea if this change, or a related one that gives 
> > functions declared inside anonymous namesspaces, will make it into Gcc 
                                                ^^^^^ 
    add to that "special treatment by the unit-at-a-time optimizer"
> > 3.4?
> 
> The -fwhole-program patch definitly won't go for 3.4.  In fact I would
> prefer first some kind fo plan how to deal with the difference of
> linkages in between frontend and backend notion before pushing that
> patch out, so I am not sure I will to that very soon even for mainline.
> 
> My patch is not going to solve problem above, it is just hitting it in
> yet annother scenario, so if we will fix it, I would hope that we can do
> that for 3.4 too.

OK.  Thanks for the clarification.

--- 
http://kevin.atkinson.dhs.org