On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Chris Lattner <[email protected]> wrote:
> Oh I agree.  I'm sorry, I should have mentioned that this is a short-
> term hack.  I really think the right answer is to bite the size cost
> and bump tokens up to being 12 bytes instead of 11.  This would allow
> us to read a token by doing 3 4-byte loads, and wouldn't require
> target-specific hacks.

Does this have to be tied to the size of Token; the data & size in the
PTH file shouldn't need to be tied to the Token structure?

 - Daniel
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to