On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 5:20 AM, Jason Merrill <ja...@redhat.com> wrote: > Most build_* functions have variadic versions, but build_constructor doesn't > as of yet, and it would be convenient for a patch I'm working on. I decided > to call it build_constructor_va, but am open to other naming ideas. > > Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. OK for trunk?
Eh, two NULL_TREE terminators are ugly ... callers know the number of elements, so maybe instead pass that number as argument? It looks like build_constructor_single can be implemented (or completely replaced by) build_constructor_va (build_constructor_single is nearly unused). Can we overload build_constructor with a variadic variant? Thus, tree build_constructor (tree type, vec<constructor_elt, va_gc> *vals); tree build_constructor (tree type, unsigned n, ...); one of the nice things of using C++ is that we don't have to invent fancy names for different interfaces of the same thing. Richard.
