From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7194 invoked by alias); 18 Sep 2002 04:48:54 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 7182 invoked from network); 18 Sep 2002 04:48:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.cdt.org) (206.112.85.61) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 18 Sep 2002 04:48:52 -0000 Received: from www.dberlin.org (pool-138-88-148-121.esr.east.verizon.net [138.88.148.121]) by mail.cdt.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33CF1490054; Wed, 18 Sep 2002 00:26:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from dberlin.org (unknown [192.168.0.252]) by www.dberlin.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 461021810062; Wed, 18 Sep 2002 00:48:51 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 21:48:00 -0000 Subject: Re: [RFA] convert blocks to dictionaries, phase 1, main part Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v546) Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz , David Carlton , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com To: Andrew Cagney From: Daniel Berlin In-Reply-To: <3D87874F.8010603@ges.redhat.com> Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-09/txt/msg00376.txt.bz2 On Tuesday, September 17, 2002, at 03:49 PM, Andrew Cagney wrote: >>> ndamental data structures and algorithms completly replaced. >> I think this is just as true of GDB. > > Can you expand. GCC is getting an entirely new tree representation. > I don't see GDB getting anything that fundamental. > No it isn't. The IR is being changed, but the changes are not revolution, they are evolution, as you put it. This is not some major data structure change, it involves changing some enums and macro names, and changing the functions as appropriate for new semantics. Of course, i'm summarizing a large amount of code (I work on the branch in question every day :P) in one sentence, so someone may take issue with it. But in terms of "how deep it goes", this is as fundamental as the changes GDB needs in the areas i mentioned. No more, no less. It may seem more fundamental to someone who doesn't work on the internals of compilers, but trust me, it's not. --Dan