On Tue, 2019-03-12 at 16:08 +0100, Martin Liška wrote: > Hi. > > I've thinking about the file split about quite some time, mainly > in context of PR84402. I would like to discuss if it's fine for > maintainers of the target to make such split and into which logical > components can the file be split? > > I'm suggesting something like: > - option-related and attribute-related stuff (i386-options.c - as > seen in patch) > - built-in related functions > - expansion/gen functions - still quite of lot of functions, would > make > sense to split into: > - scalar > - vector > - prologue/epilogue, GOT, PLT, symbol emission > - misc extensions like STV, TLS, CET, retpolines, multiversioning, .. > - helpers - commonly used functions, print_reg, ix86_print_operand, > .. > > I am volunteering to make the split, hopefully early in the next > stage1. > > Thoughts?
IIRC we had a policy that new C++ source files (as opposed to tests) get a .cc extension, rather than .c I'm not sure if that applies in the case of a split like this one. Dave
