From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 56492 invoked by alias); 10 Jun 2017 05:54:38 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 56477 invoked by uid 89); 10 Jun 2017 05:54:37 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=H*RU:209.85.128.194, Hx-spam-relays-external:209.85.128.194, tired X-HELO: mail-wr0-f194.google.com Received: from mail-wr0-f194.google.com (HELO mail-wr0-f194.google.com) (209.85.128.194) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Sat, 10 Jun 2017 05:54:33 +0000 Received: by mail-wr0-f194.google.com with SMTP id g76so10561740wrd.2 for ; Fri, 09 Jun 2017 22:54:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:user-agent:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:subject:to:cc:from :message-id; bh=v+Grh38kareTDSRQtTDXNOAq9lHjh/tnBUAV+vKYyI4=; b=SoajF8AD7U5KK8OqV3J5IxEoelHkiAmQ2I2HVsS442q6e4fCSqFI5+LFs2BzVmpsyM s+5EnZ17gXHo+IMz7X1694UCe5w1/0UKyZBV4nunMB0hOpA3pYAZa0l6lDhjbPL0ZG44 pMh5cPYcPsNUzY6oKKxSPYWgj3A6c+miSrG4wXo5KAORkd+YkwWTEnW3GBJ1tEzZmrl5 b6OVYcbpAcAl07qwGsYA39fUwfps7GqsdwBOhZEkPgmSVU9gY96wWIOx+GLw42D1iZE0 Whle+6rlKajQ2HWPwUyZ6ENEQCw3KKZYJbb6KVf9GW+WbLZBnn0jmNEFcySoIIgHWCmY b3dg== X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcCQaOZ4HC2lisluhNqq8WAJTvdQq4kl8mLEo1ta9QxjadScUJwl tu56sZNFsuq1F0MuVg8= X-Received: by 10.223.171.77 with SMTP id r13mr1128922wrc.83.1497074075369; Fri, 09 Jun 2017 22:54:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from android-4c5a376a18c0e957.fritz.box (p5494E583.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [84.148.229.131]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a9sm5921791wrc.22.2017.06.09.22.54.33 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 09 Jun 2017 22:54:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2017 05:54:00 -0000 User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: RFA: PATCH to add id_strcmp helper function To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org,Jason Merrill ,Jakub Jelinek CC: gcc-patches List From: Richard Biener Message-ID: <1A5E79D8-BDDB-4C51-ABED-BD43B121885C@gmail.com> X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2017-06/txt/msg00698.txt.bz2 On June 9, 2017 10:07:36 PM GMT+02:00, Jason Merrill wro= te: >On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 5:52 PM, Jason Merrill >wrote: >> On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 11:03 PM, Martin Sebor >wrote: >>> On 05/18/2017 08:30 PM, Jason Merrill wrote: >>>> >>>> I got tired of writing strcmp (IDENTIFIER_POINTER and decided to >wrap >>>> it in an inline function. I decided to use "id_strcmp" instead of >>>> just overloading strcmp, but I don't feel strongly about that >choice. >>>> >>>> The second patch changes all existing uses of that pattern to use >the >>>> new function. >>>> >>>> OK for trunk? >>> >>> >>> Since all the uses are of the form !id_strcmp(), would taking >>> a step further and introducing a bool id_equal() be going too >>> far? >>> >>> Besides being (arguably) easier to read, it would get around >>> the question of whether it should be !id_strcmp() or >>> id_strcmp =3D=3D 0, or perhaps even 0 =3D=3D id_strcmp(). >> >> Makes sense. >> >> OK for trunk? > >Ping? OK. Richard.