This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [tree-ssa] Removal of gotos from cfg based ir
On Thu, 2003-11-27 at 16:51, Zdenek Dvorak wrote:
> Hello,
>
> > > 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.
>
I understood that the intention was to translate to CFG form, and keep
the CFG straight through the expanders and into RTL.
Is that not the case?
Andrew