On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 11:09:26AM -0400, Diego Novillo wrote: > On 6/26/07 4:08 PM, Diego Novillo wrote: > > > But, first, I'd like to know what folks think about this. Would it be > > generally useful for us to have the IL data structures auto-generated > > this way? I can see the benefits in the reader/writer. But also, we > > are going to have to re-implement the reader/writer when we move GIMPLE > > out of the tree data structures. OTOH, we will probably change them, > > add new codes and having them autogenerated may have other advantages. > > One thing I forgot to add is that auto-generating .h files is not really > necessary. We can always parse the .h files directly. As long as we > have either easy to spot markers (a-la GTY) or just write the structs in > a clear manner, it should be straightforward.
For the record, I'm not a big fan of auto-generating the .h files. Too much work, for too little gain.
