Some questions about FIELD_DECL

[Mark Mitchell]

Daniel Berlin wrote:
> While moving FIELD_DECL to it's own substruct, the following questions
> have come up.  I figured one of you might know:
> 
> 1. Do we need DECL_ASSEMBLER_NAME on FIELD_DECL?  I can't think of a
> place where we would actually try to *output* a FIELD_DECL directly, but
> maybe i've missed something.  I ask because the C frontend tests
> decl_assembler_name on field decl, but never sets it on them.
> 
> Related to this:
> 
> 2. Do we allow setting the section of a FIELD_DECL, so that
> DECL_SECTION_NAME on FIELD_DECL is necessary?

We should need neither DECL_ASSEMBLER_NAME nor DECL_SECTION_NAME.  If we 
do, that's a bug in whatever is using them -- but I don't know how hard 
it would be to fix.  In GCC, things that look like fields, but are 
really variables, like C++ static data members or anonymous union 
members, should be represented as VAR_DECLs.

-- 
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery, LLC
mark@codesourcery.com
(916) 791-8304