> > OK. I wonder if we can/should carve off some bits to note > type_with_linkage_p and type_in_anonymous_namespace_p in the tree > itself? At least in type_common there's plenty of bits left. > Not sure how expensive / reliable (non-C++?) those tests otherwise are.
It also makes me wonder if other languages (D, Ada, go, Fortran...) have concept of anonymous namespace types - that is types that are never interoperable with types from another translation unit. That would justify the extra flag pretty well. Similarly for types with name mangling defined. Both these bits can be made indpendent of C++. Honza
