On 9/3/12, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Aug 24, 2012, Lawrence Crowl wrote:
> > To take full advantage of the conversion to C++, we will need to use
>
> I'm not sure what "full advantage" of single-inheritance vs. composition
> is.
You get automatic pointer-to-base-class conversion with single
i
On 8/31/12, Laurynas Biveinis wrote:
GRAMMAR
Support adding a second discriminator. This support is not for
multiple inheritance, but for single inheritance when a second
discriminator is used to further refine it. Look at struct
tree_omp_clause. It contains a sub
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 10:06 PM, Lawrence Crowl wrote:
> To take full advantage of the conversion to C++, we will need to use
I'm not sure what "full advantage" of single-inheritance vs. composition is.
> single inheritance in some of our garbage collected structures. To
> that end, we need to
>>> GRAMMAR
>>>
>>> Support adding a second discriminator. This support is not for
>>> multiple inheritance, but for single inheritance when a second
>>> discriminator is used to further refine it. Look at struct
>>> tree_omp_clause. It contains a sub union. We can represent the
>>> hierarchy l
On 8/30/12, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> On Aug 30, 2012 Richard Henderson wrote:
> > On 08/27/2012 11:58 AM, Lawrence Crowl wrote:
> > > > > I wonder if the second discriminator support is easily
> > > > > generalizable to enabling any derived class being a root
> > > > > class on it own with its o
On 8/30/12, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 08/27/2012 11:58 AM, Lawrence Crowl wrote:
>>> I wonder if the second discriminator support is easily generalizable
>>> to enabling any derived class being a root class on it own with its
>>> own subtree? If I understand correctly, the GTY syntax would be
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 11:57 AM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 08/27/2012 11:58 AM, Lawrence Crowl wrote:
>>> > I wonder if the second discriminator support is easily generalizable
>>> > to enabling any derived class being a root class on it own with its
>>> > own subtree? If I understand correct
On 08/27/2012 11:58 AM, Lawrence Crowl wrote:
>> > I wonder if the second discriminator support is easily generalizable
>> > to enabling any derived class being a root class on it own with its
>> > own subtree? If I understand correctly, the GTY syntax would be the
>> > same.
> If I understand corr
On 8/27/12, Laurynas Biveinis wrote:
> I don't have an opinion from the rest of compiler point of view, but
> gengtype implementation-wise, it certainly looks doable. One minor
> comment below -
>
>> GRAMMAR
>>
>> Support adding a second discriminator. This support is not for
>> multiple inherita
Lawrence -
I don't have an opinion from the rest of compiler point of view, but
gengtype implementation-wise, it certainly looks doable. One minor
comment below -
> GRAMMAR
>
> Support adding a second discriminator. This support is not for
> multiple inheritance, but for single inheritance when
To take full advantage of the conversion to C++, we will need to use
single inheritance in some of our garbage collected structures. To
that end, we need to make gengtype understand single inheritance.
Here are my thoughts on how to make that happen.
There are two major sections, one for non-poly
11 matches
Mail list logo
