Oh wait wrong patch. You talking about binfo confused me. Anyways, I re-added this because replacing Java's usage of TYPE_METHODS with TYPE_FIELDS even when I properly checked for different types of functions still broke things, so I added this as a stopgap.
No idea what you are talking about with binfo though, I added binfo for the reasons you can see in the email above, nothing to do with TYPE_METHODS. On Sat, Nov 26, 2022 at 11:16 AM Zopolis0 <creatorsmith...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Because the frontend uses TYPE_BINFO specifically. It expects a TYPE_BINFO > that writes to this value, and will break with replacements. I have tried a > number of alternatives, and this is what works. > > I can't use lang_1 because other frontends use it in ways that java doesn't > expect and I can't create a replacement for TYPE_BINFO because then it won't > have the regular checks that TYPE_BINFO has. > > I couldn't find a better solution because I'm not particularly versed with > the internal workings of gcc, if you can think of a better idea feel free to > let me know. > > On Sat, 26 Nov 2022 at 07:20, Richard Biener <richard.guent...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> On Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 9:55 AM Zopolis0 via Gcc-patches >> <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: >> > >> >> Why add this when nothing uses it and you need to re-add binfo because >> of this? If the frontend uses >> it then add it to lang_type.
