From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 543 invoked by alias); 27 Aug 2009 11:50:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 378 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Aug 2009 11:50:37 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from pier.botik.ru (HELO pier.botik.ru) (193.232.174.1) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 27 Aug 2009 11:50:30 +0000 Received: from adam.botik.ru ([193.232.174.4]:40797 ident=Debian-exim) by pier.botik.ru with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MgdUo-0005Zh-2z for gcc@gcc.gnu.org; Thu, 27 Aug 2009 15:50:26 +0400 Received: from lexa by adam.botik.ru with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MgdUn-00023A-G8; Thu, 27 Aug 2009 15:50:25 +0400 Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 13:29:00 -0000 From: "Alexei I. Adamovich" To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org Bcc: "Alexei I. Adamovich" Subject: Help ! Frozen by a comment in gcc/c-common.h! Message-ID: <20090827115025.GA7870@adam.botik.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2009-08/txt/msg00508.txt.bz2 Hi All! While modifying the C lexer to accommodate it for experimental C-derived language front-end, I've stumbled across the following comment in gcc/c-common.h before the "enum rid" definition (still there in gcc-4.5-20090820 snapshot): 42 /* Reserved identifiers. This is the union of all the keywords for C, 43 C++, and Objective-C. All the type modifiers have to be in one 44 block at the beginning, because they are used as mask bits. There 45 are 27 type modifiers; if we add many more we will have to redesign 46 the mask mechanism. */ 47 48 enum rid 49 { 50 /* Modifiers: */ 51 /* C, in empirical order of frequency. */ 52 RID_STATIC = 0, 53 RID_UNSIGNED, RID_LONG, RID_CONST, RID_EXTERN ... Could you please enlighten me -- is the comment still relevant? If so, where the usage of type modifiers entries in enum rid as mask bits can be seen in gcc code (or documentation, if applicable)? I'd like to be aware, since I've defined several (four) additional type modifiers. Thanks in advance, Alexei I. Adamovich