This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
> Yes, but that's what we compiler guys are supposed to be good at.
> Where reasonable, we should try to program as we would like our users
> to program. If the only way to get good code out of GCC is with giant
> macros-of-doom, then we haven't done our jobs properly.
I think that for_each_rtx construct just sometimes tend you to change a way
algorithm works somewhat and still compilers are far away from being able
to repair such an problem.
BTW making for_each_rtx inline is just another papering around - gcc should
be able to do inlining around compilation units once...
> I agree taht being able to include small expressions directly inline
> seems convenient.
> Still, let's continue to use the function paradigm for now. Frankly,
> I think we can get a large amount of the speedup that way, and that
> we'll get more over time as we improve the rest of the compiler.
OK. Lets try - I will send then the patch containing same code in for_each_rtx
and we can decide to make it inline eventually. Still there isn't equivalent
for the _PUSH macro, so many function will still have to recurse explicitly.
> Mark Mitchell email@example.com
> CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com