On Nov 9, 2006, at 11:09 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
I meant something very simple: for every type, there is a
TYPE_CANONICAL field. This is how you tell whether two types are
equivalent:
TYPE_CANONICAL (a) == TYPE_CANONICAL (b)
Ah, yes, that would work. Hum, so simple, why was I thinking
something was not going to work about it. There are advantages to
real-time conversations... anyway, can't think of any down sides
right now except for the obvious, this is gonna eat 1 extra pointer
per type. In my scheme, one would have to collect stats on the sizes
to figure out if there are enough types that don't have typedefs to
pay for the data structure for those that do. I think mine would
need less storage, but, your scheme is so much easier to implement
and transition to, that, I think it is preferable over an along side
datatype. Thanks for bearing with me.
