From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13602 invoked by alias); 24 Jul 2005 06:28:22 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 13498 invoked by uid 48); 24 Jul 2005 06:28:14 -0000 Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2005 06:50:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20050724062814.13497.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20050723202503.22635.pinskia@gcc.gnu.org> References: <20050723202503.22635.pinskia@gcc.gnu.org> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/22635] OVERLOAD should not be a linked list of trees X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2005-07/txt/msg03049.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-24 06:28 ------- If you look at both PR 8361 and 12850, they average both more than 40 Overloadeds. Those are both real code so I don't know why people think this is stupid. Also linked lists especially with extra locations still available is stupid. Look OVERLOAD only takes at max a pointer and boolean. The type is shared. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22635