Hi David, On Thu, 11 Feb 2016, David Malcolm wrote: > I've (mostly) ported gcc-python-plugin to gcc 6. The attached patch > for the gcc website starts a new "Plugin issues" section, and covers > the biggest issue I ran into (FWIW the suggested compatibility typedef > is the one I committed to gcc-python-plugin).
this is lovely, thanks for doing it! Just some small editorial comments; please go ahead and commit after making (or at least considering) them. Index: htdocs/gcc-6/porting_to.html =================================================================== +<h3>"gimple" became a struct, rather than a pointer</h3> Should this be <code>gimple</code>? +Prior to GCC 6, "gimple" meant a <b>pointer</b> to a statement. It was a +typedef aliasing the type <code>struct gimple_statement_base *</code>: Same here. +<p>"gimple" is now the statement <b>struct</b> itself, not a pointer. +The "gimple" struct is now the base class of the gimple statement class +hierarchy, and throughout gcc every <code>gimple</code> was changed to a ..and here. gcc -> GCC How about "every instance of <code>gimple</code>" ? +(revision +<a href="https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=42acab1cd6812e2d9e49f4132176f5505f49a0e5";>r227941</a> +was the commit in question). The typedef <code>const_gimple</code> is no more; "is the commit" ? +change. If you aim for compatibility between both gcc 6 and earlier +releases of gcc, it may be cleanest to introduce a compatibility typedef GCC 6 GCC Thank you, Gerald
