From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29655 invoked by alias); 19 Jan 2004 21:15:01 -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 29635 invoked from network); 19 Jan 2004 21:15:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.9) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 19 Jan 2004 21:15:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 19004 invoked from network); 19 Jan 2004 21:14:55 -0000 Received: from taltos.codesourcery.com (zack@66.92.218.83) by mail.codesourcery.com with DES-CBC3-SHA encrypted SMTP; 19 Jan 2004 21:14:55 -0000 Received: by taltos.codesourcery.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 19 Jan 2004 13:14:54 -0800 From: "Zack Weinberg" To: kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu (Richard Kenner) Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: Can we speed up the gcc_target structure? References: <10401191907.AA00753@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 21:15:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <10401191907.AA00753@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> (Richard Kenner's message of "Mon, 19 Jan 04 14:07:25 EST") Message-ID: <87oeszprn5.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/msg01381.txt.bz2 kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu (Richard Kenner) writes: > If done right, it ought to be simpler than target macros. If you look > at individual target macros in isolation, conversion from macro to > hook invariably makes the back-end interface simpler, just because it > forces you not to do the horrible define-here-redefine-there mess that > is the current state of a lot of the macros. > > True for some, but not others. Yes, we have a lot of macros which are actually > functions, but we also have a lot of macros that are just a half dozen > tokens which would have to be converted into a function. Do you have any in particular in mind? zw