On 2012-12-01 20:44 , Lawrence Crowl wrote:
Index: gcc/gimple-fold.c =================================================================== --- gcc/gimple-fold.c (revision 193902) +++ gcc/gimple-fold.c (working copy) @@ -30,6 +30,7 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3. #include "tree-ssa-propagate.h" #include "target.h" #include "gimple-fold.h" +#include "gimplify-ctx.h"/* Return true when DECL can be referenced from current unit. FROM_DECL (if non-null) specify constructor of variable DECL was taken from. Index: gcc/tree-mudflap.c =================================================================== --- gcc/tree-mudflap.c (revision 193902) +++ gcc/tree-mudflap.c (working copy) @@ -43,6 +43,7 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3. #include "ggc.h" #include "cgraph.h" #include "gimple.h" +#include "gimplify-ctx.h" extern void add_bb_to_loop (basic_block, struct loop *); Index: gcc/tree-inline.c =================================================================== --- gcc/tree-inline.c (revision 193902) +++ gcc/tree-inline.c (working copy) @@ -48,6 +48,7 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3. #include "value-prof.h" #include "tree-pass.h" #include "target.h" +#include "gimplify-ctx.h"
I don't follow. It seems that factoring into gimplify-ctx.h does not actually buy much. The files using it are just including *another* file. Whereas previously, they were getting that content from gimple.h.
Unless we can stop including gimple.h from these files, I don't see a lot of gain in this factoring. Am I missing something?
Diego.
