This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: libg++ won't build with latest snapshots
- To: oliva at lsd dot ic dot unicamp dot br
- Subject: Re: libg++ won't build with latest snapshots
- From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2000 07:32:08 -0800
- Cc: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Organization: CodeSourcery, LLC
- References: <oremcfcp05.fsf@benta.lsd.ic.unicamp.br><19991226072643Z.mitchell@codesourcery.com><or66x8ud6o.fsf@benta.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>
>>>>> "Alexandre" == Alexandre Oliva <oliva@lsd.ic.unicamp.br> writes:
>> + /* Don't use tree-inlining for functions with named return
>> values. + That doesn't work properly because we don't do any
>> translation of + the RETURN_INITs when they are copied. */ +
>> DECL_UNINLINABLE (current_function_decl) = 1;
Alexandre> Is this supposed to remain so, or will there be some
Alexandre> effort to arrange that functions with named return
Alexandre> values become inlinable?
They're still RTL inlinable -- nothing has been lost relative to the
good old days.
Alexandre> uninlinable, I'll post a patch to the docs to state
Alexandre> this. Maybe we should even deprecate named return
Alexandre> values, now that we have inlining of trees, which I
Alexandre> believe accomplishes a similar degree of optimization.
Actually, the thing that provides equivalent optimization is the
return-value optimization. That's certainly feasible, now that we can
operate on trees, but I'm not sure when it will get done.
--
Mark Mitchell mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com