Hi Richard, Richard Guenther <richard.guent...@gmail.com> skribis:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 10:23 AM, Ludovic Courtès [...] >> The needs of plug-ins cannot be anticipated; artificially restricting >> what plug-ins can do is likely to hinder wider extension of GCC. > > Extension of GCC should happen within the GCC codebase. Plugins > are not a replacement of improving GCC! Yes, I agree. However, I’m sure that GCC can be extended in ways that are very valuable, yet that would not fit in GCC itself for various administrative or technical reasons. I find it important to help such unanticipated uses of GCC spread. >> For instance, I would expect a large subset of <tree.h> and <cgraph.h> >> to be stable (it’s been the case in my experience between 4.5 and 4.7.) >> The rest can be tagged with a special convention (for instance, an ‘i_’ >> prefix), to make it clear that it’s only meant for internal consumption. >> >> WDYT? > > Sounds like a stupid idea that does not work The current situation is that nothing, or everything, is considered internal, depending on who you ask. ;-) The above suggestion would be a recognition that yes, plug-ins /do/ need <tree.h> & co. to do anything meaningful, but at the same time that parts of it are internal and /will/ break eventually. Thanks, Ludo’.
