This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [tree-ssa] Removal of gotos from cfg based ir
- From: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
- To: law at redhat dot com
- Cc: Andrew MacLeod <amacleod 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: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 15:34:15 -0500
- Subject: Re: [tree-ssa] Removal of gotos from cfg based ir
- References: <200311142027.hAEKRfrP031838@speedy.slc.redhat.com>
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 13:27:41 -0700, email@example.com wrote:
> In message <1068841018.2305.264.camel@p4>, Andrew MacLeod writes:
> >On Fri, 2003-11-14 at 15:11, Jason Merrill wrote:
> >> On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 13:00:15 -0700, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> >> > 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.
We (currently) annotate statements with their EH region; the EH region
table has the corresponding landing pad label.
> >Where are they kept then? In a side table? like the CFG is :-)
> But is the information necessary to build that side table still available
> in the IL?
(1) We absolutely rely on this information being kept until
we get to rtl. Once we're done with lowering here, if we lose
the information there's no way to recover it!