On 10/16/2017 02:49 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On October 13, 2017 8:29:40 PM GMT+02:00, Nathan Sidwell <nat...@acm.org> wrote:
I intend to continue cleaning this up of course. It's not clear to me
whether we should cache these node sizes in an array, and the way it
goes about checking nodes with nested switches is understandable, but
possible not the fastest solution. However let's at least get the
sizing
right first.
We were conservative exactly to avoid the langhook here. I think there's
similar 'bug' on the decl side.
The other code types (decls, exprs, etc) call the langhook. tcc_type
seems the exception (now?).
nathan
--
Nathan Sidwell
