Some questions about FIELD_DECL

[Mark Mitchell]

Daniel Berlin wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-05-23 at 12:26 -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> 
>>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.
> 
> 
> Only one place was attempting to set them (the C++ FE, and the patch
> removed it), and one place was attempting to verify them (this was the
> gcc_assert you didn't like :P)

Great; thanks.

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