From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4337 invoked by alias); 19 Jan 2004 18:03:49 -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 4142 invoked from network); 19 Jan 2004 18:03:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.9) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 19 Jan 2004 18:03:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 7057 invoked from network); 19 Jan 2004 18:03:33 -0000 Received: from taltos.codesourcery.com (zack@66.92.218.83) by mail.codesourcery.com with DES-CBC3-SHA encrypted SMTP; 19 Jan 2004 18:03:33 -0000 Received: by taltos.codesourcery.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 19 Jan 2004 10:03:33 -0800 From: "Zack Weinberg" To: kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu (Richard Kenner) Cc: ian@wasabisystems.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: Can we speed up the gcc_target structure? References: <10401191153.AA27414@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 18:03:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <10401191153.AA27414@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> (Richard Kenner's message of "Mon, 19 Jan 04 06:53:25 EST") Message-ID: <871xpvrf2i.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.110002 (No Gnus v0.2) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2004-01/txt/msg01325.txt.bz2 kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu (Richard Kenner) writes: > I have to say that I was never happy with the move to the target structure, > but couldn't completely put my finger on why. > > One reason I didn't like it was a feeling that it made references to these > parameters lexically more complex and hence made the code harder to read, but > that's not a strong reason. > > Howver, *this* is the reason I was trying to express: a significant fraction > of these parameters are constants on most targets and we lose that with a > move to the target structure. Does your opinion change if the target parameters are properly redesigned, as I suggested in another message to this thread? zw