On 08/28/2017 01:05 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote: > >> As for the name, get_nonvoid? Ugh. Not sure. Open to suggestions. > > I'd rather avoid "nonvoid", since the use of VOIDmode for "no mode" is > really an implementation detail in things like opt_mode <scalar_int_mode>. > Other possiblities might be: Yea, good point on encoding the implementation detail not being a good idea.
> > - require > - demand > - mode > - get_mode > - require_mode > - demand_mode > - else_fail (to go with else_void and else_blk) > - noelse require, demand with or without the _mode suffix seem good to me. jeff
