Re: PATCH: SSA for hard registers

[Michael Meissner <meissner at cygnus dot com>]

On Tue, Aug 01, 2000 at 12:06:23AM -0600, Jeffrey A Law wrote:
> 
>   In message <20000731195703R.mitchell@codesourcery.com>you write:
>   > >>>>> "Richard" == Richard Henderson <rth@cygnus.com> writes:
>   > 
>   >     Richard> On Mon, Jul 31, 2000 at 07:29:24PM -0700, Jeffrey
>   >     Richard> D. Oldham wrote:
>   >     >> I copied the assert definition from the previously extant
>   >     >> gcc/dwarf2out.c file.
>   > 
>   >     Richard> Then that should be fixed as well.
>   > 
>   >     >> Would it not be better to move it to some header file to make
>   >     >> it available for use in all files?
>   > 
>   >     Richard> Alternately, we can retain the style we're currently
>   >     Richard> using.
>   > 
>   > I don't care too much about this issue.  I do think assert is a
>   > slightly nicer assertion than the more macho `if (!e) abort ()' thing.
>   > I think that incrementally changing over to using assert is
>   > reasonable.  Perhaps we should call it gcc_assert or something, just
>   > to avoid accidental conflict with assert in other header files.
> I don't see how assert buys us anything significant over what we're doing
> with abort, particularly with how we redefine abort.

Well a standard assert can be defined to nothing if NDEBUG is defined, if you
want to live dangerously and ignore the checks....

-- 
Michael Meissner, Red Hat, Inc.
PMB 198, 174 Littleton Road #3, Westford, Massachusetts 01886, USA
Work:	  meissner@redhat.com		phone: +1 978-486-9304
Non-work: meissner@spectacle-pond.org	fax:   +1 978-692-4482