Related articles |
---|
[18 earlier articles] |
Re: Data Structure Reorganizing Optimizations glew@ichips.intel.com (1994-11-13) |
Re: Data Structure Reorganizing Optimizations glew@ichips.intel.com (1994-11-13) |
Re: Data Structure Reorganizing Optimizations monnier@di.epfl.ch (1994-11-14) |
Re: Data Structure Reorganizing Optimizations rockwell@nova.umd.edu (1994-11-14) |
Re: Data Structure Reorganizing Optimizations dsiebert@icaen.uiowa.edu (1994-11-14) |
Re: Data Structure Reorganizing Optimizations ok@cs.rmit.oz.au (1994-11-21) |
Re: Data Structure Reorganizing Optimizations thorinn@diku.dk (1994-11-21) |
Re: Data Structure Reorganizing Optimizations praetorius@figs.enet.dec.com (1994-11-23) |
Newsgroups: | comp.arch,comp.compilers |
From: | thorinn@diku.dk (Lars Henrik Mathiesen) |
Keywords: | optimize, design |
Organization: | Department of Computer Science, U of Copenhagen |
References: | 94-10-108 94-11-099 |
Date: | Mon, 21 Nov 1994 10:27:16 GMT |
dsiebert@icaen.uiowa.edu (Doug Siebert) writes:
>why not use a C keyword to indicate when the optimizations *can* be done?
>This allows the optimizations to be done, without causing any problems for
>older code. Unfortunately, a good keyword doesn't exist, but we can pick one
>from the list of reserved words. Maybe a 'void struct'?
Well, a struct-or-union-specifier has a tag `slot' where one could put
extra keywords if so inclined. How about
typedef struct foo static { ... } foo;
to indicate a structure type whose layout can be optimized for the
current compilation unit; using |static| even makes some sort of
sense. (This is the same position that base class specifiers occupy in
C++, but I think that ``our'' extension will fit before the colon.)
Lars Mathiesen (U of Copenhagen CS Dep) <thorinn@diku.dk> (Humour NOT marked)
--
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.