From f6e0c332bd3172d2f12c0c50dba351e6a4c513c5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: =?utf8?q?G=C3=B6tz=20Lindenmaier?= Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 12:28:01 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] why not? [r5290] --- ir/tr/entity_t.h | 8 ++++++-- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/ir/tr/entity_t.h b/ir/tr/entity_t.h index a9842c71d..6f7a55267 100644 --- a/ir/tr/entity_t.h +++ b/ir/tr/entity_t.h @@ -219,13 +219,17 @@ __get_entity_peculiarity(const entity *ent) { } /** - * @todo why peculiarity only for methods + * @todo Why peculiarity only for methods? + * Good question. Originally, there were only description and + * existent. The thought was, what sense does it make to + * describe a field? With inherited the situation changed. So + * I removed the assertion. GL, 28.2.05 */ static INLINE void __set_entity_peculiarity(entity *ent, peculiarity pec) { assert(ent && ent->kind == k_entity); /* @@@ why peculiarity only for methods? */ - assert(is_Method_type(ent->type)); + //assert(is_Method_type(ent->type)); ent->peculiarity = pec; } -- 2.20.1