From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11788 invoked by alias); 27 Oct 2009 12:18:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 11779 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Oct 2009 12:18:24 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SARE_MSGID_LONG40,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-vw0-f181.google.com (HELO mail-vw0-f181.google.com) (209.85.212.181) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 27 Oct 2009 12:18:20 +0000 Received: by vws11 with SMTP id 11so553vws.0 for ; Tue, 27 Oct 2009 05:18:18 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.220.127.2 with SMTP id e2mr9317082vcs.10.1256645898245; Tue, 27 Oct 2009 05:18:18 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4AE6E471.4020200@starynkevitch.net> References: <4AE6E471.4020200@starynkevitch.net> Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 13:29:00 -0000 Message-ID: <84fc9c000910270518s147e0cc4t7f1cd53049c5d590@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: plugin hooks From: Richard Guenther To: Basile STARYNKEVITCH Cc: GCC Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 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: 2009-10/txt/msg00550.txt.bz2 On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 1:15 PM, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote: > Hello All, > > I feel that the current plugin hooks, that is the set of plugin events > enumerated in the enum plugin_event of gcc/gcc-plugin.h and the associated > API in gcc/plugin.h (e.g. register_attribute) is perhaps still incomplete. > > My feeling is that adding plugin events (at least those for which > invoke_plugin_callbacks is not called a lot of times) is a negligible > addition that fits well in the current stage 3 of the trunk. > What do you think about that? > > The point is that some plugins will need a lot more hooks, and that waiting > for 4.6 or 5.0 (i.e. the next release after 4.5 from current trunk) will > delay them possibly for at least a year. And adding these additional hooks > seems easy and reasonable now. And perhaps adding new functions (I am > thinking of register_plugin_builtin) to facilitate plugin extensions. > > I started adding a new wiki page http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/plugin%20hooks to > list the possible addition that should go into trunk > > Comments are welcome. > > Should I try to propose some patches to gcc-patches@ about that, or is it > impossible in the current stage3 of the trunk? Adding hooks just because you think they might be useful isn't the way to go. Richard.