On Thu, 14 Nov 2013, Diego Novillo wrote: > This patch contains the mechanical side-effects from > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-11/msg01663.html
There are rather a lot of "Include tm.h" changes here - especially in front ends, where we've tried to eliminate tm.h calls, and put comments on some of those remaining saying exactly what target macros are used to make clear what's needed to eliminate them. Putting in these includes, without clear comments explaining how to eliminate them, seems a step backwards. As far as I can see, your previous patch did not add any declarations to tm.h itself, so I guess this is because files are now including some other header that has a tm.h requirement. This indicates that this other header needs to be split up, with the parts needing tm.h separate from those that don't (well - a more logical split would be better than one based on "needing tm.h"), to avoid regressing so much in the elimination of tm.h from front ends. (FWIW, I consider tm.h one of the worst headers in modularity terms, and one of the most important to eliminate includes of.) -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com
