Re: Target macros vs. target hooks - policy/goal is hooks, isn't it?

2010-06-03 Thread Richard Guenther
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Ira Rosen wrote: > > > Richard Guenther wrote on 03/06/2010 02:00:00 > PM: > >> >> tree-vectorizer.h:#ifndef TARG_COND_TAKEN_BRANCH_COST >> >> tree-vectorizer.h:#ifndef TARG_COND_NOT_TAKEN_BRANCH_COST >> >> tree-vectorizer.h:#ifndef TARG_SCALAR_STMT_COST >> >> tree

Re: Target macros vs. target hooks - policy/goal is hooks, isn't it?

2010-06-03 Thread Ira Rosen
Richard Guenther wrote on 03/06/2010 02:00:00 PM: > >> tree-vectorizer.h:#ifndef TARG_COND_TAKEN_BRANCH_COST > >> tree-vectorizer.h:#ifndef TARG_COND_NOT_TAKEN_BRANCH_COST > >> tree-vectorizer.h:#ifndef TARG_SCALAR_STMT_COST > >> tree-vectorizer.h:#ifndef TARG_SCALAR_LOAD_COST > >> tree-vectori

Re: Target macros vs. target hooks - policy/goal is hooks, isn't it?

2010-06-03 Thread Richard Guenther
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 9:01 AM, Ira Rosen wrote: > > > Steven Bosscher wrote on 02/06/2010 06:13:36 PM: > >> >> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 7:16 PM, Mark Mitchell > wrote: >> > Ulrich Weigand wrote: >> > >> >>> So the question is: The goal is to have hooks, not macros, right? If >> >>> so, can revie

Re: Target macros vs. target hooks - policy/goal is hooks, isn't it?

2010-06-03 Thread Ira Rosen
Steven Bosscher wrote on 02/06/2010 06:13:36 PM: > > On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 7:16 PM, Mark Mitchell wrote: > > Ulrich Weigand wrote: > > > >>> So the question is: The goal is to have hooks, not macros, right? If > >>> so, can reviewers please take care to reject patches that introduce > >>> ne

Re: Target macros vs. target hooks - policy/goal is hooks, isn't it?

2010-06-02 Thread Steven Bosscher
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 7:16 PM, Mark Mitchell wrote: > Ulrich Weigand wrote: > >>> So the question is: The goal is to have hooks, not macros, right? If >>> so, can reviewers please take care to reject patches that introduce >>> new macros? >> >> I don't know to which extent this is a formal goal

Re: Target macros vs. target hooks - policy/goal is hooks, isn't it?

2010-05-28 Thread Paolo Bonzini
On 05/26/2010 07:03 PM, Ulrich Weigand wrote: This is the reason why we implemented TARGET_ADDR_SPACE_KEYWORDS as macro (note that all the other address-space related back-end callbacks were already implemented as hooks to begin with). One nice cleanup would be to merge the per-address-space ho

Re: Target macros vs. target hooks - policy/goal is hooks, isn't it?

2010-05-26 Thread Michael Meissner
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 10:16:22AM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote: > Ulrich Weigand wrote: > > >> So the question is: The goal is to have hooks, not macros, right? If > >> so, can reviewers please take care to reject patches that introduce > >> new macros? > > > > I don't know to which extent this is

Re: Target macros vs. target hooks - policy/goal is hooks, isn't it?

2010-05-26 Thread Mark Mitchell
Ulrich Weigand wrote: >> So the question is: The goal is to have hooks, not macros, right? If >> so, can reviewers please take care to reject patches that introduce >> new macros? > > I don't know to which extent this is a formal goal these days, but I > personally agree that it would be nice to

Re: Target macros vs. target hooks - policy/goal is hooks, isn't it?

2010-05-26 Thread Ulrich Weigand
Steven Bosscher wrote: > So the question is: The goal is to have hooks, not macros, right? If > so, can reviewers please take care to reject patches that introduce > new macros? I don't know to which extent this is a formal goal these days, but I personally agree that it would be nice to eliminat

Target macros vs. target hooks - policy/goal is hooks, isn't it?

2010-05-26 Thread Steven Bosscher
Hello, Just yesterday alone, I found two target *macros* introduced in 2008/2009: TARGET_ENUM_VA_LIST, introduced by: 2008-07-06 Kai Tietz * config/i386/i386.h (TARGET_ENUM_VA_LIST): New. * doc/tm.texi (TARGET_FN_ABI_VA_LIST): New. (TARGET_CANONICAL_VA_LIST_TYPE): New