On Wed, Jun 02, 2010 at 06:52:11PM +0100, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> > Currently targetm is a struct with function pointers, so calling
> > targetm.hook_xyz ();
> > means reading a pointer from &targetm + off, then calling it.
> > If you make it a class with virtual functions and targetm
> > would be an object of that class, then
> > targetm.hook_xyz ();
> > call means reading pointer from &targetm (the vtable pointer), followed
> > by reading the function pointer from the virtual table, then calling it.
> > One extra memory read for hook call.
>
> A missing virtual hook would be a build failure, rather than a runtime
> error. So the advantage is easier maintenance.
All the target hooks have defaults, so what means a missing virtual hook?
And, how often are target hooks changed compared to how often target hooks
are called during compilation?
Jakub
