Andrew MacLeod <amacl...@redhat.com> wrote: >On 10/02/2013 07:58 AM, Andrew MacLeod wrote: >> On 10/02/2013 04:37 AM, Richard Biener wrote: >>> On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 11:01 PM, Andrew MacLeod ><amacl...@redhat.com> >>> wrote: >>>> This patch moves prototypes into gimple-fold.h (which already >existed). >>>> There were a few in tree-flow.h and a bunch in gimple.h. The >>>> routines are >>>> used frequently enough that it makes sense to include gimple-fold.h > >>>> from >>>> gimple.h instead of from within each .c file that needs it. >>>> (presumably why >>>> the prototypes were in gimple.h to begin with). I took >gimple-fold.h >>>> out of >>>> whatever .c files it was included in. >>>> >>>> tree-ssa-copy.h was also created for the prototypes in that file >and >>>> included from tree-ssa.h. >>> These should probably be moved elsewhere (tree-ssa-copy.c is >supposed >>> to be the copy propagation pass file). But that can be done as >>> followup. >>> >>> >> hmm, easy enough to move them *all* to tree-ssa-propagate.[ch] right >> now and check it in... That seems like the right place for all of >> them and then we don't even need to create tree-ssa-copy.h...? >> >Like so.. and directly include tree-ssa-propagate.h in the 3 .c files >that need it now. > >bootstrapped on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.. regressions running. Prefer >this?
Yes. Richard. >Andrew
