Re: [patch] Create gimple-expr..[ch] ... was Re: RFC: gimple.[ch] break apart

2013-11-07 Thread Diego Novillo
On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 8:23 AM, Andrew MacLeod wrote: > On 11/07/2013 05:36 AM, Basile Starynkevitch wrote: >> >> On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 11:26:46AM -0500, Andrew MacLeod wrote: >>> >>> I decided to name the new file gimple-expr.[ch] instead of >>> gimple-decl This will eventually split into

Re: [patch] Create gimple-expr..[ch] ... was Re: RFC: gimple.[ch] break apart

2013-11-07 Thread Andrew MacLeod
On 11/07/2013 05:36 AM, Basile Starynkevitch wrote: On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 11:26:46AM -0500, Andrew MacLeod wrote: I decided to name the new file gimple-expr.[ch] instead of gimple-decl This will eventually split into gimple-type.[ch], gimple-decl.[ch], and gimple-expr.[ch]. Since we ar

Re: [patch] Create gimple-expr..[ch] ... was Re: RFC: gimple.[ch] break apart

2013-11-07 Thread Basile Starynkevitch
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 11:26:46AM -0500, Andrew MacLeod wrote: > > I decided to name the new file gimple-expr.[ch] instead of > gimple-decl This will eventually split into gimple-type.[ch], > gimple-decl.[ch], and gimple-expr.[ch]. Since we are adding *new* C++ files, can't we please na

Re: [patch] Create gimple-expr..[ch] ... was Re: RFC: gimple.[ch] break apart

2013-11-05 Thread Jeff Law
On 11/05/13 09:26, Andrew MacLeod wrote: On 10/30/2013 11:18 PM, Andrew MacLeod wrote: As a result, any gimple queries regarding types, decls, or expressions are actually tree queries. They are sprinkled throughout gimple.[ch] and gimplify.[ch], not to mention tree.[ch] as well as other parts