Re: [patch][rfa] Ordering insns in hash chain for cgen disassemblers

[Doug Evans <dje@transmeta.com>]

Dave Brolley writes:
 > Doug Evans wrote:
 > >Setting aside the state of the implementation of ifield assertions
 > >(since I don't remember what it is), why wouldn't an ifield assertion
 > >work here?
 > >
 > Yes, I specified them fully and found that they are ignored  :-(

Then a todo item (I saw a mention of this in the docs).  Wanna do it?
That's a more preferable patch than the current one (I think!).

I'm not going to argue for it's removal but fwiw it slightly bothers me.
I worry it's just going to cause headaches.
[While not being the only cause of the worry, question: how will this
sort play with ifield assertion support when it's added, and the
user's expectation that things are picked based on order in the file.
Maybe you could choose to not sort insns with ifield assertions, I guess.
But then things would be getting a bit convoluted.]

 > >(or see the static fn decls at the top of cgen-dis.c)
 > >
 > That was there already.

No claim was made that you had written it (though I can see that
one might infer that), and yes I realize it was there already.