From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-173978-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 2913 invoked by alias); 15 Apr 2012 20:11:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 2902 invoked by uid 22791); 15 Apr 2012 20:11:41 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.8 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,KHOP_RCVD_TRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mail-iy0-f175.google.com (HELO mail-iy0-f175.google.com) (209.85.210.175)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 15 Apr 2012 20:11:28 +0000
Received: by iaag37 with SMTP id g37so6920317iaa.20        for <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>; Sun, 15 Apr 2012 13:11:28 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.50.77.138 with SMTP id s10mr3628589igw.48.1334520687940; Sun, 15 Apr 2012 13:11:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.231.150.213 with HTTP; Sun, 15 Apr 2012 13:11:27 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAPOVtOuperE_MCquHvXdRSki1hmgLUBQ9dB3pWuY7UiaWsWJfQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4F7B356E.9080003@google.com>	<CAGWvnymDHXtN1AR9hdrYpV7UVw-rkk5ZiM0kS9DbVLY24xQ-6Q@mail.gmail.com>	<CAAiZkiA29bnrEHg3jHyOtmdFo1HewaW-rp3KYOKC+gfEQ1pXzA@mail.gmail.com>	<CAFiYyc0wG3ha4B4BgA6g4NPnBG6Pj3iuMZ+_B+3AOgBkKvXpLg@mail.gmail.com>	<4F7C35A3.3080207@codesourcery.com>	<CAFiYyc0knheu7jRBUd5Vtva5Bj7GBypzCQ9BFmFYGXzLcFBYGA@mail.gmail.com>	<CAAkRFZ+4RfHszKh50DW1wKSis0wo3516Hy8626FNpYwgGWdABQ@mail.gmail.com>	<20120410084614.GJ6148@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz>	<CAPOVtOuperE_MCquHvXdRSki1hmgLUBQ9dB3pWuY7UiaWsWJfQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2012 20:11:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CAPOVtOtD1tUt9sMnNVf8CYk=MdSpmn-3+dEi4CHUj2NizCiaUA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Switching to C++ by default in 4.8
From: Chiheng Xu <chiheng.xu@gmail.com>
To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Cc: Xinliang David Li <davidxl@google.com>, Richard Guenther <richard.guenther@gmail.com>, 	Bernd Schmidt <bernds@codesourcery.com>, Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@integrable-solutions.net>, 	David Edelsohn <dje.gcc@gmail.com>, Diego Novillo <dnovillo@google.com>, gcc <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2012-04/txt/msg00655.txt.bz2

On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Chiheng Xu <chiheng.xu@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> And I want to say that tree/gimple/rtl are compiler's data(or state),
> not compiler's text(or logic), the most important thing about them is
> how to access their fields.
>

Given the above assumption, now I doubt the necessity of accessor
macros or C++ getter/setter method.

Is "tree->code" more direct and efficient than "TREE_CODE(tree)" or
"tree->get_code()" ?


-- 
Chiheng Xu