This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [tree-ssa] Removal of gotos from cfg based ir
> > And in fact this is not quite related. What is important for this is
> > whether we want to have cfg at these stages; if so, we will have to
> > update it anyway, regardless of whether the gotos are expressed
> > explicitly or not.
> Its abosultely related, and central to the issue. Thats not for us to
> decide, thats for the people writing those passes to decide. If they
> dont want or need a CFG fopr whatever they want to do to the IL, we
> ought not be forcing them to use one because we think its a good idea in
> some other part of the compiler.
and I have never proposed anything like that, did I? I simply state that
for usage during the cfg-based optimizations the no-goto form is more
convenient (which IHMO is obvious, and I and Honza have based this
claim on several examples) and that I consider it a reason
good enough for using it.
Frankly, I don't like the way you try to argument:
"I don't want to have no-gotos cfg form, because there are optimizations
that don't work over cfg."
I just don't see the connection between these issues.