On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 3:25 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
> On 11-07-12 16:34 , Gabriel Charette wrote:
>
>> We probably want pph_register_decl_in_symtab to be inline as it does
>> so little now.
>
> It doesn't really matter all that much. Given that it's a static function,
> the compiler will inline
On 11-07-12 16:34 , Gabriel Charette wrote:
We probably want pph_register_decl_in_symtab to be inline as it does
so little now.
It doesn't really matter all that much. Given that it's a static
function, the compiler will inline it (or not) as an optimization. The
'inline' keyword is more a
I like the modified implementation with VEC.
We probably want pph_register_decl_in_symtab to be inline as it does
so little now.
Now that you simply chainon bindings, you probably want to nreverse
them before you chain them on (this way we will stream them in from
first->last as this pacth does (
