On 11/19/12, Diego Novillo <dnovi...@google.com> wrote: > On Nov 19, 2012 Michael Matz <m...@suse.de> wrote: > > So, yes, the larger layouting should be determined by name of the > > dump function. A flag argument might look nice from an interface > > design perspective, but it's harder to use in the debugger. > > As long as all these different objects share the same data > structure, we will need to have different named entry points. > Ideally they would all respond to 'dump(t)' and overloading will > figure it out automatically. For now, we'll need dump_function, > dump_tree, dump_generic, and we may need a few more.
Diego and I talked about this a bit more, and would like to explore a set of dump names that distinguish between dumping the head of an item and its body. In essence, the former asks for the function declaration, the latter its definition. Comments? -- Lawrence Crowl
