Hi, On Tue, 10 Apr 2012, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > *) gcc implementation has lots of hard coded TREE_OPERAND (exp, nn) > > > > e.g. > > exp->as_component_ref().get_field() .. > > exp->as_mem_access().get_base() ... > > exp->as_mem_acesss().get_address() --> produces the > > address expression for memory access > > exp->as_mem_access().get_alias_handle () > > > > gimple_inst->serialize (&fixup_list) --> a virtual > > function overriden by actual instruction types that knows its byte > > code format. > > That silently assumes we want to change basic GIMPLE/tree data structures > to virtual classes, which is a significant change that has a significant > cost as well. E.g. all such changed data structures grow by a virtual > pointer field. Those data structures are heavily optimized for memory > footprint. > Not to mention it is very questionable if the above stuff is more readable > than what we currently have. Actually it's not questionable. The above stuff is _horrible_. Ciao, Michael.