From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8248 invoked by alias); 18 Jan 2004 20:10:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 8241 invoked from network); 18 Jan 2004 20:10:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO frothingslosh.sfbay.redhat.com) (66.187.237.200) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 18 Jan 2004 20:10:05 -0000 Received: from frothingslosh.sfbay.redhat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by frothingslosh.sfbay.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i0IKA4OG014354; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 12:10:04 -0800 Received: (from rth@localhost) by frothingslosh.sfbay.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0IKA4Nw014352; Sun, 18 Jan 2004 12:10:04 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: frothingslosh.sfbay.redhat.com: rth set sender to rth@redhat.com using -f Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2004 20:10:00 -0000 From: Richard Henderson To: Ian Lance Taylor Cc: "Kaveh R. Ghazi" , gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: Can we speed up the gcc_target structure? Message-ID: <20040118201004.GA14248@redhat.com> Mail-Followup-To: Richard Henderson , Ian Lance Taylor , "Kaveh R. Ghazi" , gcc@gcc.gnu.org References: <20040118083738.10772.qmail@gossamer.airs.com> <200401181357.i0IDvpWF004706@caip.rutgers.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-SW-Source: 2004-01/txt/msg01188.txt.bz2 I think perhaps we might be willing to move *some* things back to Where they can be seen to be compile-time constants. However, anything we move back had better be constant. I do not want anyone to be tempted to do sneak more and more complex macros back into header files in the name of optimization. r~