Re: [PATCH] Make BLOCK_START and BLOCK_END into rvalues

[Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>]

Simon> This is similar to what I'm doing to struct type, so it would be nice to agree
Simon> on the way forward for all these structures, and change them in a consistent
Simon> manner.

Makes sense.

Simon> Since you are changing the places that modify the field values, I'd suggest
Simon> adding the setter right away, it's a step in the right direction.

Simon> And I'd suggest adding the getter too, changing the BLOCK_START macro to use
Simon> it, it shouldn't be much more work.  And it will achieve the goal of making
Simon> the macro yield an rvalue.

I wasn't sure whether setters and getters would provide any real value.
Aside from some maybe-future idea of changing the getter, in other
situations they are just wrappers for the field.

For struct type, maybe it makes more sense, because one (very-)
long-term idea there would be to split up struct main_type into an
inheritance hierarchy, so that each type can be more obviously
type-safe, and also carry just the data it needs.

I don't mind making the change -- it's easy enough to do.

Tom