On 05/09/14 12:47, David Malcolm wrote:
Jeff: thanks. Note that I'm currently working on a grand renaming, as
per the subthread here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-05/msg00346.html
so that all of these will be "gphi *" rather than "gimple_phi", with
analogous change to the other classnames in the rest of the patches.
So there's both
(A) a shortening of:
gimple_phi
to
gphi
and
(B) a change in "pointerness" (eliminating the typedefs), to:
gphi *
and these obviously affect the entire patch series, so what I would
commit is beginning to look rather different from what I've posted,
albeit with largely mechanical changes.
Are these patches going to need re-review when the renaming is done, or
are the changes sufficiently mechanical so as to be "grandfathered in"
from these reviews that you're doing; I'm slightly nervous about the
pointerness change, but bootstrap®rtesting ought to catch typo issues
there when manually fixing up the later patches.
I think the renaming is mechanical enough that no additional reviews
would be necessary.
The /89 patch series as a whole is pretty mechanical. There's two or
three types of patches I've seen as I go through them and for those
kinds of patches, I looked at the first couple pretty closely, then less
so for later ones.
[In any case, this is all in a holding pattern for trunk until after
4.9.1]
Right. But I've got some time now and getting the kit as a whole
approved so that you're good to go when 4.9.1 is done is valuable. Who
knows what kind of crazyness will interfere with my time next month!
jeff
