Re: [patch] Remove TARGET_ADDR_SPACE_KEYWORDS target macro

2010-05-27 Thread Ulrich Weigand
Michael Meissner wrote: > On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 08:09:57PM +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > > In the current patch, the SPU back-end uses somewhat of a hack to actually > > perform that call: it is included in the REGISTER_TARGET_PRAGMAS macro. > > Note that this macro is already being used by the

Re: [patch] Remove TARGET_ADDR_SPACE_KEYWORDS target macro

2010-05-26 Thread Michael Meissner
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 08:09:57PM +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > Mike Meissner wrote: > > On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 10:16:22AM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote: > > > Ulrich Weigand wrote: > > > > > > >> So the question is: The goal is to have hooks, not macros, right? If > > > >> so, can reviewers pleas

Re: [patch] Remove TARGET_ADDR_SPACE_KEYWORDS target macro

2010-05-26 Thread Mark Mitchell
Ulrich Weigand wrote: > * c-common.h (c_register_addr_space): Add prototype. > (ADDR_SPACE_KEYWORD): Remove. > * c-common.c (c_register_addr_space): New function. > (c_addr_space_name): Reimplement. > (c_common_reswords): Do not include TARGET_ADDR_SPACE_KEYWORDS. >

[patch] Remove TARGET_ADDR_SPACE_KEYWORDS target macro

2010-05-26 Thread Ulrich Weigand
Mike Meissner wrote: > On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 10:16:22AM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote: > > Ulrich Weigand wrote: > > > > >> So the question is: The goal is to have hooks, not macros, right? If > > >> so, can reviewers please take care to reject patches that introduce > > >> new macros? > > > > > >