On Fri, 2 Aug 2019, Richard Biener wrote:
> The qsort_r method is named vec::sort instead of being an overload
> of vec::qsort because that would need parentizing all uses as the
> macro definition otherwise matches...
Or simply handling a two-argument qsort call in the macro :) But I think
vec::sort is slightly preferable to a new overload.
Also the mix of C-style casts and C++ const_casts in tree-ssa-loop-im
comparators is screaming for a more graceful spelling. Applying the
following as obvious:
* tree-ssa-loop-im.c (sort_bbs_in_loop_postorder_cmp): Simplify casts
from 'const void *'.
(sort_locs_in_loop_postorder_cmp): Likewise.
--- a/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-im.c
+++ b/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-im.c
@@ -1583,8 +1583,8 @@ sort_bbs_in_loop_postorder_cmp (const void *bb1_, const
void *bb2_,
void *bb_loop_postorder_)
{
unsigned *bb_loop_postorder = (unsigned *)bb_loop_postorder_;
- basic_block bb1 = *(basic_block *)const_cast<void *>(bb1_);
- basic_block bb2 = *(basic_block *)const_cast<void *>(bb2_);
+ basic_block bb1 = *(const basic_block *)bb1_;
+ basic_block bb2 = *(const basic_block *)bb2_;
class loop *loop1 = bb1->loop_father;
class loop *loop2 = bb2->loop_father;
if (loop1->num == loop2->num)
@@ -1599,8 +1599,8 @@ sort_locs_in_loop_postorder_cmp (const void *loc1_, const
void *loc2_,
void *bb_loop_postorder_)
{
unsigned *bb_loop_postorder = (unsigned *)bb_loop_postorder_;
- mem_ref_loc *loc1 = (mem_ref_loc *)const_cast<void *>(loc1_);
- mem_ref_loc *loc2 = (mem_ref_loc *)const_cast<void *>(loc2_);
+ const mem_ref_loc *loc1 = (const mem_ref_loc *)loc1_;
+ const mem_ref_loc *loc2 = (const mem_ref_loc *)loc2_;
class loop *loop1 = gimple_bb (loc1->stmt)->loop_father;
class loop *loop2 = gimple_bb (loc2->stmt)->loop_father;
if (loop1->num == loop2->num)
