Re: [RFA] Type cleanups

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>]

On Mon, May 13, 2002 at 03:54:29PM -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> > > cache, and no one has noticed me adding another assertion to every 
> > > gdbarch accessor function, I don't expect changing the above to opaque 
> > > to be a significant problem :-)
> > 
> > I think you may be underestimating the frequency of some of the TYPE
> > accessors... but if I get a chance, I'll benchmark it.
> If worst comes to worst, you can always make them static inlines in the 
> header.
> That way, you can still debug them easily, but if optimization is on, ....
> --Dan

The problem is, then the type isn't opaque.  Or if it is, it's opaque
via some casting, which makes debugging more annoying.

(Though I should really just write some good gdb macros and utility
functions for debugging types; with the other type patch I posted,
printing the type becomes somewhat less useful.)

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz                           Carnegie Mellon University
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer