http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55721



--- Comment #4 from Steven Bosscher <steven at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-12-18 
22:47:15 UTC ---

(In reply to comment #1)

> Actually the MIPS backend does have an UNSPEC 230.  It is one of the

> SYMBOL_64_* unspecs.



Then, why is symbol_type not defined within define_c_enum "unspec"?

That'd make the dumps easier to interpret, the name will be printed...

Reply via email to