This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [tree-ssa] Removal of gotos from cfg based ir
- From: Andrew MacLeod <amacleod at redhat dot com>
- To: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>, Zdenek Dvorak <rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz>, gcc-patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, jh at suse dot cz
- Date: 14 Nov 2003 15:16:51 -0500
- Subject: Re: [tree-ssa] Removal of gotos from cfg based ir
- References: <200311142000.hAEK0FfF031461@speedy.slc.redhat.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
On Fri, 2003-11-14 at 15:11, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 13:00:15 -0700, email@example.com wrote:
> > In message <20031114070054.GD18752@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>, Zdenek Dvorak writes:
> > >> First and foremost the IL is no longer a complete representation of the
> > >> program. To me that seems like the wrong direction from a design standpoint.
> > >
> > >it is not now,
> > Err, yes it is. We can derive all the EH state for the CFG from the IL. At
> > least that's the way it used to work, and I serious doubt Richard's changes
> > changed that fundamental concept.
> I believe they did. I don't see anything in the .eh dump to indicate which
> labels eh edges go to.
Where are they kept then? In a side table? like the CFG is :-)