Re: egcs-19980803 (pre-1.1) solaris regressions

[Jeffrey A Law <law at cygnus dot com>]

  In message <199808181749.KAA02644@netcom8.netcom.com>you write:
  > I suppose it's a matter of perspective whether one regards flow as broken 
  > or reorg as broken, but from a practical standpoint of long-term code 
  > maintenance, it seems better to fix one compiler pass (flow) to provide 
  > accurate information instead of trying to kludge n other compiler passes 
  > to deal with inaccurate information.
Well, until very recently we didn't even have the option of trying to
fix reorg.

I'll go on record now that I would prefer to see the basic block data
structures and such accurate after reload, even if that means we have
to run a mini dataflow analysis or flesh out more of the live range
splitting support code.  I think that's cleaner than a mega patch and
magic NOTE_INSN_DELETED notes.

Note that this will not be for egcs-1.1; making this stuff accurate
should happen on the mainline tree.


jeff