On 11/06/2011 02:09 AM, Richard Guenther wrote: >> > Richi, do you have any particular issue with the attribs.c change? Does >> > this context resolve any questions you may have had? > ... no, it just looked weird without seeing a use. Now, target specific > attributes on a non-target specific builtin are of course weird. Which > explains the patch, sort-of. Still feels like a hack, but I can't think > of anything better, other than a target hook that we'd call for > all middle-end builtins we generate and which would allow target specific > modifications. No idea if that would be better. I'll defer to rth for this.
I tried 2 or 3 ideas on the way to this hack. I guess the idea of a target hook that gets called for *all* builtins has a better chance of being useful for something else in the future. I'll work up something and see if it looks any cleaner... r~
