shouldn't every middle-end pass be uniquely named?

[Basile STARYNKEVITCH]

Hello All,

Some middle-end passes (those declared in tree-passes.h) are still unnamed.

I tend to believe that it would be helpful (mostly for gcc debugging 
purposes) that every struct opt_pass (without exception) should be 
uniquely named (and that this should be enforced, eg. in ENABLE_CHECKING 
mode (essentially by registering each pass in an hash table in function 
next_pass_1 of gcc/passes.c)

What do people think about that?

Except as a habit (which I think is a bad one) is there any reason to 
have anonymous passes (those with a null pass->name), or (I don't know 
if such beast exists) homonym passes (two different passes with equal 
pass->name)?

Regards.
-- 
Basile STARYNKEVITCH         http://starynkevitch.net/Basile/
email: basile<at>starynkevitch<dot>net mobile: +33 6 8501 2359
8, rue de la Faiencerie, 92340 Bourg La Reine, France
*** opinions {are only mines, sont seulement les miennes} ***