On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 02:55:43PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 09/05/14 16:38, Trevor Saunders wrote:
> >
> >So, in this case it seems to me you basically have two options
> >
> >A. change the macro to an inline function, and fix up all the callers to
> >pass the right type. Then rebase that into
On 09/05/14 15:57, David Malcolm wrote:
One other aspect of my approach is that (believe it or not) I'm trying
to minimize the size of the changes, to avoid introducing pain when
backporting bugfixes from trunk to the branches.
Right. I believe and know you're trying to avoid unnecessary pain :
On 09/05/14 16:38, Trevor Saunders wrote:
So, in this case it seems to me you basically have two options
A. change the macro to an inline function, and fix up all the callers to
pass the right type. Then rebase that into some sort of reasonable
patch series.
b. add a function with a different
Trevor Saunders writes:
> I also do think the advantages of using members outways the cost.
>
> For one thing functions with all caps names are just weird. I think the
> more important reason though is that it will help make rtx_insn be a
> separate class sometime in the far future, since at some
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 05:57:13PM -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-09-05 at 10:43 -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> > On 09/05/14 09:32, tsaund...@mozilla.com wrote:
> > > From: Trevor Saunders
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Doing this means we get to remove a fair chunk of runtime checking.
> >
On Fri, 2014-09-05 at 10:43 -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 09/05/14 09:32, tsaund...@mozilla.com wrote:
> > From: Trevor Saunders
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Doing this means we get to remove a fair chunk of runtime checking.
> >
> > bootstrapped + regtested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu with no regressions.
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 10:43:45AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 09/05/14 09:32, tsaund...@mozilla.com wrote:
> >From: Trevor Saunders
> >
> >Hi,
> >
> > Doing this means we get to remove a fair chunk of runtime checking.
> >
> >bootstrapped + regtested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu with no regressio
On 09/05/14 09:32, tsaund...@mozilla.com wrote:
From: Trevor Saunders
Hi,
Doing this means we get to remove a fair chunk of runtime checking.
bootstrapped + regtested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu with no regressions.
config-list.mk with this and the next patch is ongoing. ok?
Trev
gcc/
From: Trevor Saunders
Hi,
Doing this means we get to remove a fair chunk of runtime checking.
bootstrapped + regtested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu with no regressions.
config-list.mk with this and the next patch is ongoing. ok?
Trev
gcc/
* config/i386/i386.c, config/i386/i386.md, co
