On 11/20/2014 03:14 PM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
On 11/20/2014 03:05 PM, Michael Collison wrote:
This is a part one of two part patch that flattens gimple-streamer.h,
lto-streamer.h and tree-streamer.h. This work is part of the GCC
Re-Architecture effort being led by Andrew MacLeod.
In gimple-streamer.h I moved all exports for gimple-streamer-in.c to
a new file gimple-streamer-in.h. I also moved all exports for
gimple-streamer-out.c to a new file gimple-streamer-out.h. Finally
because gimple-streamer.h only contained exports for
gimple-streamer-in.c and gimple-streamer-out.c I removed the file.
In lto-streamer.h I moved all exports for lto-streamer-in.c to a new
file lto-streamer-in.h. I also moved all exports for
lto-streamer-out.c to a new file gimple-streamer-out.h.
In tree-streamer.h I moved all exports for tree-streamer-in.c to a
new file tree-streamer-in.h. I also moved all exports for
tree-streamer-out.c to a new file tree-streamer-out.h.
As a result of the flattening I had to add new include files to
gengtype.c.
I performed a full bootstrap with all languages on x86-linux. I also
bootstrapped on all targets listed in contrib/config-list.mk with c
and c++ enabled.
Is this okay for trunk?
Yes, so thats the question... Flattening ought not affect code
generation nor anything else since its just a simple restructure of
includes.
We could maintain these in a branch, but due to the nature of the
changes, they can bit rot really quickly so its nicer to get them into
trunk (especially with other large changes still going in)
So the question to the maintainers is whether its permissible to do a
bit of flattening into the early parts of stage 3, or whether you'd
rather it stay on a branch until next stage 1.
Andrew
PIng.. anyone want to chime in? :-)
Andrew
