Hi Zdenek,
> > This looks like a better approach. How would we do your step 1? We
> > have var_ann and tree_ann in addition to stmt_ann. Shall we put a
> > type field at the beginning of tree_statement_list_node+stmt_ann_d so
> > that an annotation node can identify itself? (Since all these tree
> > annotations already have a field for annotation type, it's more like
> > appending tree_statement_list_node to stmt_ann_d.)
>
> I would go just for having
>
> union
> {
> struct stmt_list_node *container; /* For gimple statements. */
> tree_ann_t ann; /* For everything else. */
> }
Err, I don't see how to tell the garbage collector about this without
a type field. We cannot rely on TREE_CODE (stmt) because CALL_EXPR
may appear by itself or as an rhs of MODIFY_EXPR.
Kazu Hirata
