>>>>> "Dan" == Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Dan> Maybe at some point then we should just stop using gengtype and just Dan> hand-write the walkers once. Yeah, we could do that for the containers. GTY markers serve three purposes though: they explain the meanings of fields (this part we can handle by hand using templates and specializations), they mark roots, and they mark things for PCH. I can see how we could eliminate GTY for roots if we don't mind static constructors -- but I don't like those. Is there another way? PCH, IMO, remains the problem child. Dan> This is of course, a large change, but i'm not sure how much more work Dan> it really is than trying to understand gengtype and rewrite it to Dan> properly parse C++/support STL containers. Yeah. The cleaner the result, the better... and a prize for whoever manages to remove gengtype entirely. Tom
