Hello All I just merged the trunk (svn rev 187397) into the MELT branch (svn 187401) and I of course noticed the merging of gimple_seq into gimple (dated 2012-05-03). http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-05/msg00068.html
However, the type gimple_seq still appears in a lot of source files (mostly gcc/gimple*.c & gcc/tree*.c) Is this intended, or is this a temporary situation, and further patches would remove all occurrences of gimple_seq everywhere? If it is intended, I would really like (probably in coretypes.h near the "typedef gimple gimple_seq;" line 75, or perhaps in gimple.h) a one paragraph comment explaning when a coder should write gimple_seq and when a coder should write just gimple. If the goal is to get rid of gimple_seq completely, I suggest at least adding a comment in coretypes.h about that, and I hope that other patches will reduce the number of gimple_seq occurrences in gcc/*.c In other words, when is it good taste to write gimple in some GCC code, and when is it good taste to write gimple_seq? Even if the types are identical from the compiler (building GCC from source) point of view, are these types identical for us? If gimple is really identical to gimple_seq, I think we should get rid of the gimple_seq identifier (and replace it everywhere with gimple). Otherwise, that means that the gimple_seq name bears some (human) meaning different of gimple. Then we should document, at least in comments, and preferably also in gcc/doc/gimple.texi the meaning of each. Having both identifiers gimple & gimple_seq conveying the same meaning would be confusing, especially to plugin writers (who have less familiarity with GCC internals than we do). Regards. -- Basile STARYNKEVITCH http://starynkevitch.net/Basile/ email: basile<at>starynkevitch<dot>net mobile: +33 6 8501 2359 8, rue de la Faiencerie, 92340 Bourg La Reine, France *** opinions {are only mines, sont seulement les miennes} ***
