On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 12:11:14PM -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> aren't we already doing this with the various hooks we have?
Currently hooks are used mainly for target or language hooks, that's far
different from using virtual methods say on the tree or rtl objects.
> We do not need to generate RTTI if all we are interested in is vcalls.
I've mentioned that just that dropping the code field in tree objects would
be a bad idea, even when there is a vtable pointer.
> > In many cases it would be really addition of that pointer, dropping an 8/16
> > bit code would slow things down too much (using virtual method to get you
> > say enum tree_code from a tree would be way too slow, similarly for rtti).
>
> Currently, we go through lot of manual checking with globals tables where
> the vcall mechanism already ensures that.
That kind of checking is done with --enable-checking only, for release
compilers most of the checking isn't done and the macros result just into
field accesses.
Jakub
