http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6658
--- Comment #11 from Iain Buclaw <[email protected]> 2013-04-02 03:01:26 PDT --- (In reply to comment #10) > I don't know what dt_t is, but judging from all 3 of its mentions in the > 5381-line e2ir.c, I can only suppose that it is a leaky abstraction poking out > of the DMD backend. > > Anyway, I don't see how this applies to e2ir.c, since, as I've mentioned, dt_t > only occurs 3 times in the file. (In reply to comment #10) > I don't know what dt_t is, but judging from all 3 of its mentions in the > 5381-line e2ir.c, I can only suppose that it is a leaky abstraction poking out > of the DMD backend. > > Anyway, I don't see how this applies to e2ir.c, since, as I've mentioned, dt_t > only occurs 3 times in the file. In brief, why define all these dmd backend symbols (OPcall) that are of no use to gcc, and when you can just build gcc trees directly (CALL_EXPR)? -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
