On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 9:01 PM, Andrew MacLeod <amacl...@redhat.com> wrote: > On 10/18/2013 12:10 PM, Jeff Law wrote: >> >> On 10/18/13 07:37, Andrew MacLeod wrote: >>> >>> >>> gimple_check_call_matching_types() was being called from 3 or 4 >>> different files,and seemed more appropriate as a cgraph routine (which >>> called it 3 times). So I moved that and its helper to cgraph.c. >>> >>> After that, I only needed to update 4 .c files to directly include >>> gimple-low.h >>> >>> bootstraps on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu with no new regressions. OK? >> >> I'm less sure about this one. I don't see that it clearly belongs in >> either location. I could easily see it moving out of cgraph.c at some >> point. >> >> If it furthers your cleanup efforts at this time, that's fine. Just be >> aware that, at least IMHO, this routine doesn't fit clearly into either >> location and I wouldn't be surprised if we have to come back to it at some >> point. >> > possibly, there didn't seem to be a tree call file for call helpers, so I > went with locality :-) I will happily move it to a more appropriate place > as a follow up. cgraph.h is already a collector for the exports for a half > dozen .c file. It needs the same treatment tree-flow got.
I think that we should remove all indirect includes again at some point to get a clearer picture of what is used where. After all prototypes are in the appropriate header files, of course... So the less indirect includes the better (for now). Richard. > Andrew